Mt Baker Care Center

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

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.

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.

58.5% 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 255 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 64.0% 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 136 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 0.67 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 91% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 70 beds and averages 56.6 residents a day — about 81% occupied, or roughly 13 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 5.00 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.30 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.02 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 4.41 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.24 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.44 to 0.98 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 41% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

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.

20 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 10 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · D2026-05-12 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely 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 their abuse and neglect policy was followed for an allegation of abuse for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 1). This failed practice placed Resident 1 and all other residents at risk of abuse and neglect. Findings included.Review of the facility's policy titled, Abuse and Neglect Policy, with a review date of 11/11/2025, showed it was the policy of the facility to follow effective procedures to protect and prevent abuse of residents which included to report allegations of abuse and neglect to the appropriate authorities and investigate allegations of abuse and neglect. Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's Minimum Data Assessment (MDS- an assessment tool) dated 04/16/2026 showed the resident was assessed as cognitively intact, with no mood or behavior symptoms. Review of the facility's April and May 2026 grievance and incident logs showed no grievance or incident involving Resident 1. Review of Resident 1's Clinical Census…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-07 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 3 residents (Resident 1) received the necessary care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical level of well-being. Failure to ensure Resident 1 received care in accordance with a physician order and their care plan when they received a bath and not a shower. This failure potentially placed the resident at risk of medical complications and a decreased or diminished quality of life. Findings included .Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include vesicointestinal fistula (abnormal opening between the bladder and the intestines) and colovaginal fistula (abnormal opening between the colon and the vagina).Review of Resident 1's admission Minimum Data Set assessment (a resident assessment tool), dated 7/27/2025, showed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS - a structured cognitive interview) score of 09 which indicated the resident had moderate cognitive…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-02 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolated
  Prevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
  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 5 residents (Resident 45) reviewed for unnecessary medications, were free from unnecessary psychotropic medication (a drug that affects brain activities associated with mental processes and behavior). Failure to provide a valid diagnosis for the use of psychotropic medications placed residents at risk for receiving unnecessary psychotropic medications, for adverse events and diminished quality of life. Findings included . According to the facility policy titled Unnecessary Medication Policy (undated) showed: All medications must be supported by a documented diagnosis or clinical rationale. The Federal Drug Administration Black Box Warning for Risperidone (an antipsychotic medication) stated that elderly patients with dementia-related psychosis (mental disorder characterized by a disconnection from reality) who are treated with this medication are at a significantly higher risk of death. Risperidone is not approved for use 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-02 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans to reflect the resident's current medical status and/or to include all provided nursing services for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 54) reviewed for edema management, 1 of 2 residents (Resident 5) reviewed for discharge planning, and 1 of 2 residents (Resident 15) reviewed for dementia care. This failure placed residents at risk of not receiving needed care, decline in condition, and diminished quality of life. Findings included . <RESIDENT 54> EDEMA MANAGEMENT Resident 54 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included gastrointestinal issues, and vascular (veins) wounds with cellulitis (infection of the tissue) to both lower legs. Record Review on 06/30/2025 showed Resident 54 had orders for knee high elastic stockings ordered for lower extremity edema management on 06/18/2025, and orders for Lasix (a diuretic-removes excess water from the body) for edema on 06/26/2025. In an observation…

  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 · D2025-07-02 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide 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 3 residents (Resident 15) reviewed for Pressure Ulcers (PU), were provided care planned interventions they required for the prevention of a PU. This failure to implement pressure reducing interventions in accordance with physician's orders placed residents at risk for PU development, pain and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Resident 15 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia, high blood pressure, and peripheral vascular disease (circulatory condition that affects blood flow to limbs). Review of Resident 15's care plan, dated 12/03/2019 and revised on 03/15/2023, showed they had a focus area of skin at risk due to failure to thrive, advanced age and fragile/thin skin. The goal was Resident 15 would have no skin breakdown daily. Interventions included encouraging and assisting Resident 15 to reposition every two to three hours and as needed for comfort and to float heels…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-02 · 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 3 of 3 residents (Residents 17, 54 and 160) were free of unnecessary drugs due to lack of monitoring and care planning of high-risk medications, including lack of assessment for anti-coagulant (blood thinning medication) use and edema (accumulation of fluid in the body) monitoring. These failures could result in unrecognized change in condition for Resident 54 related to lack of edema monitoring and Resident's 17 and 160 experiencing unrecognized signs and symptoms of bleeding while receiving an anti-coagulant medication and placed all residents at risk for adverse effects of high-risk medications. Findings included . Manufacturer recommendations regarding the use of Eliquis/Apixaban (anti-coagulant) stated the most common side effects were bleeding and bruising more easily. Indications for the use of the drug were that it was typically used to reduce the risk of stroke, prevent the formation of blood clots. <RESIDENT 17> 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-02 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff were following established guidelines related to Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP), which are infection control interventions designed to reduce the transmission of multi-drug-resistant organisms in healthcare settings, for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 19) reviewed for pressure ulcers. These failures placed residents and staff at risk for potential infection from cross contamination of infectious organisms. Findings included . EBP focuses on the use of gowns and gloves during specific high risk resident care activities and is implemented for residents known to be infected, colonized, or at increased risk for acquiring a multi-drug-resistant organism, including residents with chronic wounds or indwelling devices. Record Review on 06/30/2025 at 12:22 PM documented Resident 19 developed a pressure ulcer to the right heel related to a hard cast. The ulcer onset date was documented as 12/04/2024, when the hard cast was removed and the ulcer was discovered. The record documented the wound remained open…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-04-12 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
  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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide assistance with activities of daily living to include personal hygiene and bathing for 5 of 5 sampled dependent residents (Residents 7, 9, 11, 49 and 10) reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL's). Facility failure to provide resident's, who were dependent on staff for assistance with hygiene including oral care, and showers placed residents and others at risk for embarrassment, poor hygiene, unmet care needs and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the facility's policy, Bathing/Showers, revised 06/23/2023, showed the policy was to ensure residents are receiving proper personal hygiene regarding bathing and the facility is meeting their needs and bathing preferences. If a shower /bath cannot be physically tolerated by the resident a bed bath would be offered. Refusals would be documented, and staff would reapproach. If multiple refusals occur, the LN to be informed. Showers/baths are also given 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-04-12 · tag F0637 — isolated
  Assess the resident when there is 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 identify a significant change in status for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident 22), reviewed for Hospice services. Failure to identify and complete a Significant Change in Status assessment, according to the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI - consists of three basic components: The Minimum Data Set, the Care Area Assessment process, and the RAI Utilization Guidelines. The utilization of the three components of the RAI yields information about a resident's functional status, strengths, weaknesses, and preferences, as well as offering guidance on further assessment once problems have been identified). manual, placed residents at risk for inadequate care planning and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Record review of the Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument, User's Manual, Version 3.0, dated October 2019, showed that a Significant Change in Status assessment must be conducted within two weeks of the resident's election…

  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 before2024-04-12 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to implement comprehensive person-centered care plans for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident 42) reviewed for urinary catheters (tube inserted into the bladder to remove urine), 1 of 4 sampled residents (Resident 22) reviewed for non-pressure skin alterations, and 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident 49) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This failure to ensure the comprehensive care plan was implemented placed the residents at risk for unmet care needs and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Comprehensive Care Plans, dated 07/01/2017 stated that all residents will have a comprehensive care plan developed within seven days of the comprehensive assessment. Care plans will be reviewed annually, quarterly, if there was a change in condition or as needed. All care plans will be revised based on changing goals, preferences, and needs of the resident. <URINARY CATHETER> Resident 42 admitted 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning 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.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

This home reported $307K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in WA