Arlington Health And Rehabilitation
620 South Hazel Street, Arlington, WA 98223 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 76 certified beds · (360) 403-8247 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (28% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Aug 2024
- 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
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (36) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $173,496 in federal fines (most recent 2024-08-23)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 4 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 | 19.8% | 14.2% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.6% | 5.5% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 1.0% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 3.9% | 1.6% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 65.7% | 17.7% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.5% | 2.6% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 32.7% | 17.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 11.6% | 12.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 81.0% | 93.8% | 95.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.1% | 4.3% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 28.6% | 22.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 13.2% | 15.1% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.3% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 85.0% | 82.0% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 19.4% | 19.9% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.0% | 13.4% | 12.0% | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ 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.
53.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 141 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 66.7% 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 57 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 0.32 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 53% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% 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
| 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 | 53.4%CMS range 44.2–60.3 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.2%CMS range 7.8–15.4 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | 66.7% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 54.4% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 52.6% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 97.2% | 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 | 98.1% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 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 | 5.5%CMS range 2.9–10.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.75 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 76 beds and averages 50.0 residents a day — about 66% occupied, or roughly 26 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.55 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.86 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.57 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.85 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.83 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.96 to 0.60 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 28% is below 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 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.
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.
36 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 24 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-08-23 · 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, the facility failed to provide the needed assessments and timely treatment for 1 of 1 residents (Resident 1) reviewed for an unexpected hospitalization, who experiences ongoing abdominal pain and discomfort for at least two days to the extent that staff moved the roommate out of the room and closed the door because the resident was calling out in pain. The resident experienced harm when treatment was delayed for several hours and there was a lack of effective communication with the physician. The resident was sent to the hospital the next morning and passed away shortly after admission to the hospital. The disregard of the pain the resident experienced and recognizing the need to take timely action constituted an immediate jeopardy. On 08/15/2024 at 3:35 PM, the facility was notified of an IJ in F684. The facility removed the immediacy on 08/19/2024 after they terminated the staff that failed to assess, treat and timely notify the physician of Resident 1's acute change 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.
- Actual harm · G2024-08-23 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide necessary care and services to prevent neglect for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 1) reviewed for abuse and neglect. Licensed staff was aware of the change in condition and abdominal pain experienced by Resident 1 yet did not conduct a thorough assessment or consult with the physician timely and left the resident alone in their room and in pain during the night shift with door closed for at least 30 minutes. The lack of addressing the residents needs placed all residents at risk for neglect. Review of the facility policy titled, Abuse and Neglect, undated stated the facility has effective procedures to protect and prevent neglect of residents .licensed nurses, and nurse management staff are responsible for the supervision of facility staff to identify inappropriate behaviors such as . ignoring residents and ensuring that staff are providing care as identified in the residents plan of care . The facility defines neglect as the failure of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-01-26 · 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 the facility failed to provide 3 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 3, 58, and 63) with a notice of transfer/discharge which outlined their specific rights related to their transfer/discharge and failed to notify the Long-Term Care Ombudsman for 2 of 3 residents (Resident 58 and 63) for discharge from the facility as soon as reasonably able. These failures placed residents at risk of not knowing their rights and limited their access for advocacy of their rights. Findings included . <RESIDENT 3> Resident 3 discharged on 01/13/2026 from the facility. Review of Resident 3's electronic record contained no documentation to show they received a notice of transfer/discharge prior to their discharge from the facility. In an interview on 01/26/2026 at 9:16 AM Staff I, Registered Nurse, stated when a resident discharges from the facility there was a packet of information filled out and provided to them. Staff I stated the information was kept in a folder on the wall inside the nurse's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-01-26 · tag F0645 — patternPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
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, the facility failed to ensure Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR-an assessment used to identify people referred to nursing facilities with Serious Mental Illness [SMI], Intellectual Disabilities [ID]; or related conditions are not inappropriately placed in nursing homes for long-term care) Level I screening form for an exempted hospital discharge (residents who remained in the facility for more than 30 days) was submitted for a Level II evaluation for 3 of 6 residents (Resident 1, 6, and 18) reviewed. This failure placed the residents at risk of not receiving the appropriate care and services for their needs timely and/or lacking access to specialized services for individuals with identified mental health diagnoses or disabilities.Findings included:In a review of the facility policy titled PASRR dated 01/01/2025 documented the facility would assure review of PASRR was done at admission. No information related to exempted hospital discharge were present in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-01-26 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide 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, the facility failed to ensure respiratory equipment and tubing were regularly cleaned and/or changed and dated for 3 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 2, 8, and 9) reviewed for respiratory care. This failure placed the residents at potential risk for respiratory distress, respiratory infection, and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Oxygen Administration, dated 11/15/2023, documented to change oxygen tubing weekly and to store oxygen tubing in plastic bags when not in use. <RESIDENT 8> Resident 8 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of emphysema (a chronic and progressive obstructive lung disease resulting in reduced oxygen intake) and COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease-a progressive and irreversible lung disease that restricts airflow and makes breathing difficult). In observations on 01/20/2026 at 10:59 AM and 2:13 PM, Resident 8 was receiving oxygen by nasal canula (a thin tube inserted…
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 before2026-01-26 · 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, the facility failed to ensure residents received care and treatment in accordance with professional standards of practice and received the necessary care and services to attain or maintain their highest practicable level of well-being for 1 of 1 residents (Resident 15) reviewed for hospice services and 2 of 3 residents (Resident 1 and 27) reviewed for diabetic care. The facility failed to ensure Resident 15's physician orders from hospice were implemented timely and ensure diabetic monitors were in place for Resident 1 and 27. These failures placed the residents at increased risk of unmet care needs and delay in care and treatment.Findings included .In a review of the facility policy titled Diabetic Management dated 11/2017 documented it was the facility's policy to ensure they properly managed episodes of hyper/hypoglycemia (high/low blood sugar levels). <RESIDENT 15> Resident 15 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include history of falling, dementia,…
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 · D2026-01-26 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
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 the facility failed to ensure 1 of 2 residents (Resident 17) reviewed for Pressure Ulcers (PU), were provided recommended and physician ordered interventions they required for the prevention and treatment of a PU. This failure placed residents at risk for PU development, worsening of PU, pain and a diminished quality of life.Findings included .Resident 17 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include fracture of the left upper leg, diabetes mellitus type two (disorder that disrupts the way the body uses sugar), and pressure ulcer of the sacral region and right heel.On 01/21/2026 at 9:25 AM observed Resident 17 in their room, sitting upright in their wheelchair, with a heel protector boot on their left foot only and another heel protector boot sitting on a chair across from them.In an interview on 01/21/2026 at 9:25 AM Resident 17 stated they had pressure ulcers on both of their heels, with the left side being bigger than the right.On 01/23/2026 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 · D2026-01-26 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure safety assessment and monitoring were conducted and ensure consent and/or physician orders were completed prior to placing resident's bed against the wall for 1 of 2 residents (Resident 38) reviewed for accidents/falls. These failures placed residents at risk for injury and diminished quality of life. Findings included.According to the facility policy titled Devices/Enablers Policy and Procedure, undated, any device/enabler that is ordered for a resident . has been appropriately assessed . ensure that the resident and their responsible party had been fully informed of the risks versus benefits of the device/enabler and are in agreement with it and have signed an informed consent.use of the device/enabler will be appropriately care planned and added to resident's Kardex (resident specific guide outlining care needs).Resident 38 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include Guillain-Barre Syndrome (autoimmune…
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 · D2026-01-26 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff provided medications at the appropriate time for 2 of 25 medication observations, creating an 8.33 % error rate. Failure to provide medications at the correct time placed residents at risk of decreased effectiveness of medication.Findings included.Review of an undated facility policy, titled, The 5 rights of Medication Administration, documented staff were to ensure the timing of medications was appropriate, such as timing with food.During an observation on 01/21/2026 at 8:14 AM, Staff D, Licensed Practical Nurse, provided morning medications to Resident 6. The provided medications included Sucralfate (a medication that coats the lining of the stomach for protection against stomach acid) and Pantoprazole (medication that decreases stomach acid production). Resident 6 had their meal tray at the bedside and stated they had finished their breakfast.Review of Resident 6's order summary report, effective date 01/20/2026, showed an order for Sucralfate 1 gram by mouth before meals and at bedtime, and an…
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 before2026-01-26 · 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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to properly label and/or discard undated, opened Aplisol (solution used to test for persons with possible Tuberculosis - an infectious respiratory disease), to ensure refrigerated drugs were stored at proper temperatures, and to ensure expired medications were properly disposed of in 2 of 2 medication rooms reviewed for medication storage and labeling. The facility failed to ensure treatment carts were locked for 1 of 3 treatment carts (200 hall treatment cart). These failures placed residents at risk of receiving compromised or ineffective medications and at risk for having access to treatment supplies and medications, missing medication, and access to medication by unauthorized individuals. Findings included .<LONG TERM CARE MEDICATION ROOM>In an observation on 01/20/2026 at 11:41 AM, Staff G, Registered Nurse (RN), opened the long-term care medication room for this surveyor. Review of the medication refrigerator revealed one bottle of open Aplisol solution. The label documented that the product should 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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-26 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
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 the facility failed to ensure prompt dental services were provided for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident 12) reviewed for dental services. This failure placed residents at increased risk for continued dental problems, difficulty chewing, associated health complications, and diminished quality of life. Findings included .Review of a facility policy titled, Dental Services, documented the facility would be assessed for dental health needs upon admission and periodically as part of routine health evaluations; the facility will provide or arrange for access dental services and assisted residents in scheduling appointments as needed. <RESIDENT 12> Resident 12 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS-an assessment tool) assessment, dated 01/02/2026, the resident was cognitively intact. In an interview and observation on 01/20/2026 at 11:34 AM, Resident 12 stated they had no teeth, and they could not use either upper or lower…
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 before2026-01-26 · 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 observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident meals were stored in accordance with professional standards of food safety for 1 of 3 nourishment refrigerators. The failure to ensure nourishment refrigerators were free from potential contaminants left residents at risk for food contamination, food borne illnesses, and consumption of spoiled food. Findings Included .On 01/20/2026 at 1:13 PM observed the refrigerator/freezer unit in the conference room/dining room which contained the following:-the bottom left drawer of the refrigerator contained a plate covered with foil, not dated, with a name and room number. The plate had turkey (dried on the edges), potatoes, stuffing and gravy.-Rice pudding with a name and room number with an expiration date of 01/17/2026.-Plastic bag with [pizza dated 01/18/2026.A printed sign was on the door to freezer that read: items need to be labeled with date, resident name, and thrown out after 3 days. In an interview on 01/20/2026 3:19 PM Staff M, Food Preparation Worker, removed items from the refrigerator. When asked 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.
Show the remaining 24 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-26 · 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 — 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 the facility failed to ensure a system in which resident's records were complete, accurate, accessible and systematically organized for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 17) for dialysis and 1 of 2 residents (Resident 5) reviewed for unnecessary medications. These failures placed residents at risk for not having their medical records accurate and incorrect/incomplete information being considered when making medical decisions. Findings included . <RESIDENT 5> Resident 5 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident 5 had diagnoses to include chronic pain syndrome and generalized anxiety syndrome. In a record review of Resident 5's physician orders included Methadone 5 milligrams (mg) 1 tablet by mouth every eight hours as needed for severe pain and Acetaminophen (pain medication to relieve mild to moderate pain) 325 mg two tablets every four hours as needed for pain. Resident 5 had as needed pain management non-pharmacological interventions to 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 · Fcited before2025-02-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident meals were prepared and stored in accordance with professional standards of food safety for 1 of 1 facility kitchens, and 1 of 2-nourishment refrigerators. The failure to ensure the kitchen and nourishment refrigerators were free from potential contaminants, maintenance to ensure the kitchen refrigerator and freezer were properly maintained left residents at risk for food contamination, food borne illnesses, and spoiled food. Findings Included . On 01/29/2025 at 9:23 AM observed the following in the facility kitchen refrigerator: - applesauce in a container with a green lid-undated and not labeled - opened cottage cheese container with no open date -opened freezer jam with no open date. Observed a note on the front of the refrigerator which read, all items in the refrigerators/freezers need to have labels with item and date on them no exceptions. On 01/29/2025 at 9:23 AM observed a cabinet which contained a refrigerator labeled Fruit Bar. The lower portion of the cabinet was a refrigerator containing trays…
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 · E2025-02-05 · tag F0636 — patternAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI), an assessment of a resident's needs, strengths, goals, and preferences, and included thorough summaries of the Care Area Assessments (CAA's), an assessment of a specific resident care or medical issue, to holistically analyze the plan of care for 5 of 16 residents (Residents 1, 12, 16, 22, and 32) reviewed for comprehensive assessments. This failure placed the residents at risk of not having appropriate services provided based on the resident's individualized needs and placed all other residents at risk of their needs and preferences not met. Findings included . Review of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User's Manual, Version 1.19.1, dated October 2024, showed the Care Area Assessment process reflects conditions, symptoms, and other areas of concern that are common in nursing home residents. The CAA process provides for further…
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 · E2025-02-05 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop 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 observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to review, revise and implement a comprehensive plan of care to included resident specific information for 6 of 18 sampled residents (Residents 12, 22, 34, 40, 16, & 33) reviewed for care plans. The failure to establish and implement care plans that were individualized, accurately reflected assessed care needs and provided direction to staff, placed residents at risk to receive inappropriate and inadequate care to meet their individualized needs and preferences. <RESIDENT 22> Resident 22 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia. <WANDERING> Review of Resident 22's care plan dated 05/11/2022 showed they were at risk for wandering. Interventions for Resident 22's wandering included assessing for fall risk, ensuring needs were met, identifying a pattern of wandering, use of a wander guard and the use of the fenced patio if they were looking for sun. Review of Resident 22's Document Survey Report for 1/01/2025…
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 before2025-02-05 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 5 of 7 resident's (Resident 13, 19, 20, 40, and 260) received care and treatment in accordance with professional standards of practice and received the necessary care and services to attain or maintain their highest practicable level of well-being. This failure placed all residents at increased risk of unmet care needs, medical complications and decreased quality of life. Findings included . Review of the facility Policy titled Notification of Change in Condition dated 08/30/2024 showed the facility shall promptly notify the resident, their provider, and primary contact of changes in the resident's condition and/or status. The care provider would be notified by the nurse when necessary or appropriate in the best interests of the resident. <RESIDENT 13> <WEIGHTS> Resident 13 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Admitting diagnoses to include Congestive Heart Failure (CHF - a chronic condition in which the heart does not pump blood 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-02-05 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — patternImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 2 of 5 sampled residents (1 and 22) reviewed for unnecessary medications, were free from unnecessary psychotropic medications (a drug that affects the brain activities associated with mental processes and behavior). The facility failed to ensure there were valid diagnoses for use of psychotropic medications, implement non-medication and behavioral interventions, accurately monitoring target behaviors and updating care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident 22's use of an as needed psychotropic medications was limited to 14 days. These failures placed residents at risk for receiving unnecessary psychotropic medications, for adverse events, and diminished quality of care. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled Psychotropic Medications updated 01/01/2023 showed, residents on psychotropic medications will be reviewed by the psychotropic team quarterly and more frequently, if indicated. During the quarterly…
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 · E2025-02-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that staff were compliant with Infection Prevention and Control Guidelines and standards of practice for 3 of 4 hallways with Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP), 1 of 1 observations for wound care (Resident 33), 1 of 3 residents observed during personal care (Resident 13) and 1 of 1 housekeeping staff observed for hand hygiene. The facility failed to ensure that staff used the Personal Protective Equipment ([PPE] - specialized clothing worn to protect from infection or illness) during high contact resident care activities and failed to perform proper hand hygiene. These failures placed all residents and staff at risk for the potential transmission of infections. The facility was currently in a gastrointestinal virus outbreak. Findings included . Review of a facility policy titled, Enhance Barrier Precautions, dated 10/03/2022 showed - EBP to be implemented for residents with wounds, indwelling medical devices, or residents infected…
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 · D2025-02-05 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
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 the facility failed to ensure 2 of 2 residents (Resident 5 and 263) were properly assessed for the safety of self-medication administration. This failed practice placed residents at risk for medical complications and medication errors. Findings included . Review of a facility policy titled, Self-Medication Administration dated 09/16/2022 showed: Residents who desire to self-administer medications are permitted to do so if the facility's interdisciplinary team has determined that the practice would be safe for the resident and other residents of the facility and there is a prescriber's order to self-administer. <RESIDENT 263> Resident 263 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses to include left hip fracture with surgical repair. Resident was alert, oriented and can verbalize needs. In an observation and interview on 01/30/2025 at 9:30 AM, an eye drop container labeled Pataday Ophthalmic Solution (eye drop to treat itching and redness in the eyes due to allergies)…
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 · D2025-02-05 · 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 the facility failed to provide the required beneficiary notice for 2 of 3 residents (Residents 47 and 265) reviewed for liability notices. Failure to provide the appropriate form for the beneficiary notice and failure to give the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) 48 hours before the Medicare Part A's last covered day placed the residents at risk for not being fully informed of their rights to appeal the decision to end skilled services and/or the potential costs of continued services if the residents wished to stay longer at the facility. Findings included . <RESIDENT 47> Resident 47 was discharged on 01/22/2025. Last covered day of Medicare Part A service was 01/01/2025. Review of the Advance Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage (ABN) form signed by Resident 47's spouse showed the facility used Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) form R-131. Per CMS guidelines, Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNF) should be using CMS-10055 forms for SNF ABN. In an interview on 01/31/2025 at 2:33 PM, Staff F, Social Service Director, stated that they…
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 · D2025-02-05 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to promptly initiate, resolve and document resident grievances for 2 of 4 sampled residents (Resident's 45 and 25) reviewed for grievance resolution. The failure of staff to initiate resident grievances resulted in delays in grievance resolution and an extended period where a resident went without their missing clothing, broken furnishing and placed residents at risk for frustration and diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the facility policy, titled, Grievance Policy and Procedure for Residents, revised date 04/15/2024, showed grievances were resolved immediately when possible, by the individual receiving the grievance. The policy showed grievances would be completed within 5 days and the resident would be notified and updated if the grievance took longer than 5 days. <RESIDENT 45> Resident 45 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS-an assessment tool) assessment, dated 12/15/2024, the resident 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 before2025-02-05 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure policies and procedures for timely reporting of alleged financial exploitation of 1 of 2 residents (Resident 16) reviewed for abuse/neglect. The facility failed to report to the state agency and law enforcement when a resident voiced concerns related to their financial affairs. This failure by the facility to identify, report, and investigate an allegation of potential abuse or neglect placed residents at risk of being victims of unidentified and uninvestigated abuse and/or neglect and limited the thoroughness of investigations. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Abuse and Neglect, dated 08/2024 stated the facility will report allegation(s) of abuse and neglect to the appropriate authorities. Allegations of abuse and neglect will be reported to the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) following the nursing home reporting guidelines the Purple Book. Review of the Nursing Home Guidelines, The Purple Book, October…
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 · D2025-02-05 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews the facility failed to review and revise care plans for 2 of 12 residents (Residents 40 and 1) reviewed for care planning. The failure to review and revise care plans by the interdisciplinary team placed residents at risk for unmet care needs, adverse health effects and diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Care Plan Policy, revised on 08/16/2024, showed care plans are updated with any status change and revised based on changing goals, preferences, and needs of the resident. <RESIDENT 40> Resident 40 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and recently readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included diabetes type two (a chronic condition that affects how the body uses sugar for energy), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (group of lung diseases that restrict breathing), and high blood pressure. <ACCIDENTS/FALLS> In a review of Resident 40's Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS- an assessment tool) dated…
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 · D2025-02-05 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide the necessary activities of daily living care (ADL) and services for 1 of 4 residents (Resident 263) reviewed for bathing. This failure placed the resident at risk for hygiene issues and for diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled Bathing revised on 07/01/2017 showed: Bathing schedule will be based on resident's personal requests and physical health needs. Refusal of shower/bath will be documented and reported to Licensed Nurse (LN). Resident 263 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include Left hip fracture with surgical repair. The resident was alert and can verbalize needs. According to the resident's care plan, they required 2-person maximum assist with transfers. In an interview on 01/30/2025 at 9:24 AM, Resident 263 verbalized that they had not had a shower since they were admitted at the facility and had asked staff if they can have a shower. Review of Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-05 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 40) reviewed for respiratory care. Failure to follow provider's orders for oxygen (O2) therapy placed the resident at risk for unmet needs, potential negative outcomes and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Oxygen Administration dated 10/15/2023 showed oxygen would be provided to residents to improve oxygenation and comfort to residents experiencing respiratory difficulties. The procedure included storing cannula's (tubing inserted into the nose to supply oxygen) and add oxygen to be administered by licensed staff and requires a physician order. Resident 40 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and recently readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included diabetes type two (a chronic condition that affects how the body uses sugar for energy), chronic obstructive pulmonary…
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 · D2025-02-05 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolatedProvide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
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 observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to develop a dementia care plan that addressed the physical, mental and psychosocial needs of the resident, established personalized and achievable goals, and identified interventions to promote a person-centered environment for 1 of 4 residents (Resident 22) reviewed for dementia care. These failures placed residents at risk for unmet physical and psychosocial needs, increased behaviors and decreased quality of life. Findings included . Resident 22 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia. In a review of Resident 22's Care Area Assessment (CAA-an assessment which directs the care plan development) for cognitive loss/dementia dated 11/13/2024 showed they were severely impaired, had a memory problem with confusion, disorientation and forgetfulness. The description of the impact of cognitive loss/dementia on the resident was noted to be, Resident's care plan addresses cognition impairment. Staff will continue…
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 before2025-02-05 · 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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals (diverse group of medicines made from natural sources) were refrigerated after opening from 2 of 2 medication carts (Medicare and North Hall) and expired medications and biologicals were disposed of timely in accordance with professional standards from 1 of 2 medication rooms (Medicare Hall). These failures placed residents at risk to receive expired medications, ineffective medication from lack of refrigeration, to experience adverse side effects and other potential negative health outcomes. Findings Included . On 02/03/2025 at 9:49 AM observed the refrigerator of the medication room to contain 3 vials of lorazepam (an antianxiety medication) in a small, clear bag with the expiration date of 10/2024. In addition, observed a small bag with a label that read, Promethegan, the expiration date printed on the label (2023) was crossed out and replaced by a handwritten date of 04/2025. On 02/03/2025 at 10:45 AM observed an open bottle of Acidophilus, a probiotic, with directions to refrigerate after…
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 · D2025-02-05 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure foods were served in a timely manner and were palatable for 1 of 1 Halls (South Hall) and 1 of 1 organized resident groups (Resident Council) who were interviewed about the food palatability and temperatures. Failure to meet these requirements could negatively impact the residents' nutritional status, appetite, and meal acceptance. Findings Included . In a review of facility policy titled Long Term Care Policy & Procedure Manual labeled food temperatures, undated, showed the facility recommended ranges of temperatures for the safe holding, storage and serving of foods such as hot cereal and hot beverages (coffee and tea) was at 165 degrees Fahrenheit or above. These are the standards suggested for food acceptance and palatability as well as safety. On 01/31/2025 at 8:47 AM observed a full cart of meals on trays in the hallway of South Hall. None of the trays had been served. In an interview on 01/31/2025 at 8:47 AM Staff I, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), stated the carts had just arrived a few minutes…
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 · D2025-02-05 · tag F0849 — isolatedArrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to have a system in place that ensured effective consistent communication, collaboration, and coordination of care occurred between the facility and the hospice provider for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 22) reviewed for hospice services. The facility failed to obtain and/or maintain a copy of a resident's current hospice coordinated plan of care and integrate it into the facility care plan. This failure placed the resident at risk for not receiving necessary care and services and/or unmet care needs. Findings included . Review of the facility contract with hospice, titled Nursing Facility Services Agreement dated 02/04/2020 showed in section 2.1.2 coordination with hospice regarding plan of care included design of plan, modification and monitoring of residential hospice patient. The nursing facility shall coordinate with hospice in development of a plan of care. Nursing facility agreed to abide by the plan of care. In a review of Resident 22's progress notes dated 11/13/2024 showed resident was admitted to hospice care. Review…
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 · E2024-08-23 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — patternRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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, the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation for three of three residents (1, 2, and 3) reviewed for complete and thorough investigations. The facility failed to thoroughly investigate an unexpected hospitalization that led to the death of Resident 1 and failed to thoroughly investigate two allegations of abuse towards residents (2 and 3) that involved the same staff member [Staff I, Nursing Assistant Certified (NAC)]. This failure to investigate timely and thoroughly placed residents at risk of being victims of unidentified and uninvestigated abuse and/or neglect. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Abuse and Neglect, undated stated the facility will utilize the nursing home reporting guidelines the Purple Book, October 2015 edition to investigate all allegations of abuse, and/or neglect . the facility social services, Director of Nursing services (DNS), or administrator will investigate and act to protect residents and will closely monitor…
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 before2024-08-23 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure policies and procedures for timely reporting of an unexpected death were in place for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 1) reviewed for abuse/neglect. The facility failed to report to the state agency when a resident was sent to the hospital and unexpectedly died hours later. This failure by the facility to identify, report, and investigate an allegation of potential abuse or neglect placed residents at risk of being victims of unidentified and uninvestigated abuse and/or neglect and limited the thoroughness of investigations. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Abuse and Neglect, undated stated the facility will report allegation of abuse and neglect to the appropriate authorities . Allegations of abuse and neglect will be reported to the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) following the nursing home reporting guidelines the Purple Book. Review of the Nursing Home Guidelines, The Purple Book, [DATE] (sixth edition)…
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 · D2024-01-12 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to accurately assess 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 8) reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The failure to ensure a resident had an accurate assessment placed residents at risk for unmet care needs and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Resident 8 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident 8's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS -an assessment tool) assessment, dated 10/16/2023, showed the resident was coded they were receiving hospice care while a resident in the facility. In an interview 01/11/2024 at 12:12 PM, Staff C, Registered Nurse/MDS Nurse, stated Resident 8's MDS coding they were on hospice was a mistake. Refer to WAC 388-97-1000 (1)(b) .
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-12 · tag F0646 — isolatedNotify the appropriate authorities when residents with MD or ID services has a significant change in condition.
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 the facility failed to ensure Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR - a federally required screening of all individuals who has both an Intellectual Disability or Related Condition and a serious mental illness prior to admission to a Medicaid-certified nursing facility or a significant change of condition) assessments were completed for all residents with newly evident or possible serious mental disorders for 2 of 5 sampled residents reviewed (Residents 2 and 22). This failure resulted in potential unidentified residents mental health needs, delay in access to Level II PASRR (an in-depth evaluation to determine whether the resident requires specialized rehabilitation services) services and decreased quality of life. Findings included . <RESIDENT 2> Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include transient ischemic attack (blockage of blood supply to the brain). Review of Resident 2's admission Level I PASRR (a screening to determine if…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-12 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
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, the facility failed to provide nutritional care and services for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 8) reviewed for nutrition and/or hydration. The failure to offer meal replacements and supplements when the resident consumed less than 50% of their meals placed residents at risk for nutrition-related complications and for diminished quality of life. Findings included . The resident admitted to the facility on [DATE]. On 01/11/2024, a review of the amount of meals eaten task, for the past 30 days, showed Resident 8 ate less than 50% of the 30 meals offered. On 01/11/2024, a review of the meal replacement for less than 50% of the meal eaten task, for the past 30 days, showed Resident 8 was not offered meal replacements when they ate less than 50% of their meals. 0n 01/11/2024, a review of the supplement for less than 50% of meal eaten task, for 30 days, showed Resident 8 was not offered any supplements when they ate less than 50% of their meals. In an interview on 01/11/2024 at 11:19…
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 before2024-01-12 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 2 of 5 sampled residents (Resident 15 and 21) reviewed for unnecessary medications, were free of unnecessary psychotropic medications. The facility failed to ensure there were valid diagnoses for use of psychotropic medications, to consistently monitor and care plan target behaviors, to monitor for adverse side effects, and to attempt gradual dose reductions. These failures placed residents at risk for receiving unnecessary psychotropic medications, for adverse events, and diminished quality of care. Findings included . Review of a policy titled: Psychotropic Medications, (dated 2019), showed the facility would ensure residents taking psychotropic medications were reviewed quarterly and as needed for proper diagnosis, target behaviors, behavior monitoring, care planning and gradual dose reductions. The facility would conduct AIMS (Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale) assessments for residents with orders for antipsychotic…
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.
“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
$173,496 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $173,496 — penalty dated 2024-08-23
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 REGENCY PACIFIC MANAGEMENT — 27 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 | 4 of 5 | 3.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 3.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 4.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 3.6 | +1.4 vs chain |
The other 26 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.9★, 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 / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| CURRY, NANCY | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | since 12/09/2022 |
| MACK, JENNIFER | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 10/28/2014 |
| CLAY, JAMES | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/1988 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 4 rows in the source record cover these 3 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.
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.
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 WA
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 Washington 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 505351. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-26, 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.