Three Rivers Care
1305 Alexander St, Centralia, WA 98531 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 83 certified beds · (360) 754-9792 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0602), cited Aug 2025
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
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 | 5 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-12 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 10.8% | 14.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 10.7% | 5.5% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 4.5% | 1.0% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 2.5% | 17.7% | 6.5% | better 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 | 2.3% | 2.6% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 11.2% | 17.2% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 12.9% | 12.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 7.8% | 4.3% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 15.8% | 22.5% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 14.3% | 15.1% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.7% | 1.3% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 82.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 24.9% | 19.9% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 26.1% | 13.4% | 12.0% | worse |
‡ 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.
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 24 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 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 66% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 47% 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 | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 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 | 70.8% | 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 | 62.5% | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 91.9% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. Results are based on a shorter time period than required. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 83 beds and averages 57.0 residents a day — about 69% 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 4.27 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.47 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.63 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 3.50 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.59 on weekdays — 24% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.43 to 0.58 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
9 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-18 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to complete an AIMS (Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale) test (a rating scale used to assess the severity of involuntary movements that sometimes develop as a side effect of treatment with antipsychotic medications [a class of drugs primarily used to treat mental health conditions such as hallucinations and delusions]) and/or failed to monitor for adverse side effects (ASE) of antidepressant medication (a class of drugs used to treat depression, a mental health condition characterized by persistent feelings of sadness, hopelessness, and/or loss of interest in activities) for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident 42) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This failure placed residents at risk for medication side effects, medical complications, and a diminished quality of life.Findings included . Resident 42 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses to include major depressive disorder. Record review of Resident 42's physician orders,…
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 · D2025-11-18 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop a depression (a mental health condition characterized by persistent feelings of sadness, hopelessness, and/or loss of interest or pleasure in activities) baseline care plan for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident 42) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This failure placed residents at risk for unmet care needs and a diminished quality of life. Findings included. Resident 42 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnoses to include major depressive disorder. Record review of Resident 42's level 1 Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR), dated 09/15/2025, showed Resident 42 had a Serious Mental Illness Indicator (SMI) of Mood Disorder, depression. Record review of Resident 42's updated level 1 PASRR, dated 09/22/2025, showed Resident 42 had a SMI of Mood Disorder and Anxiety (a mental health condition characterized by persistent worry, fear, and unease) disorder. The updated level 1 PASRR further documented, 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 · D2025-11-18 · 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 follow physicians' orders to assess resident's pulse (heart rate) prior to medication administration for 1 of 5 residents (Resident 30) and to administer pain medication per physician's ordered parameters for 1 of 6 residents (Resident 17), reviewed for quality of care. These failures placed residents at risk of unmet care needs, medical complications and diminished quality of life.Findings included . Resident 30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple diagnoses including Essential Hypertension (high blood pressure). The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool), dated 08/22/2025, documented Resident 30 was alert and oriented. Record review of Resident 30's physician's order, revised on 06/12/2025, documented hydrALAZINE HCl [hydrochloride - medication to treat high blood pressure] Oral Tablet 10 MG [milligram] (Hydralazine HCl) Give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day related to ESSENTIAL (PRIMARY) HYPERTENSION (I10) [diagnosis…
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 · D2025-11-18 · 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 ensure oxygen tubing was changed for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident 7) reviewed for respiratory care. This failure placed residents at risk of respiratory infections and a decreased quality of life. Findings Included. Record review of the facility's policy titled, Oxygen Management, revised 08/2023, documented .6. Change oxygen tubing weekly or when soiled, impaired integrity or as needed. Resident 7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with multiple diagnosis to include chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD, a group of lung diseases that cause long-term breathing problems) and emphysema (a chronic lung disease that causes progressive damage to the air sacs in the lungs). The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool), dated 08/23/2025, showed resident 7 was cognitively intact and had COPD or chronic lung disease. Record review of Resident 7's physician orders, dated 08/16/2025, documented, O2 [oxygen] @ [at] 1 Liter…
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 · D2025-11-18 · 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 a vial of purified protein derivative (PPD) solution (used in the skin test to diagnose tuberculosis, a lung infection), was dated with the date opened according to accepted professional standards of practice for 1 of 2 medication rooms (East Hall) reviewed for medication storage and labeling. This failure placed residents at risk of receiving expired medications and negative health outcomes.Findings included .During an observation of the East Hall medication room refrigerator with Staff E, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), on 09/22/2025 at 10:53 AM, the refrigerator was observed to have an open unlabeled vial of PPD solution that was almost empty. Staff E said it was the expectation that the PPD solution vial was labeled with the date it was first accessed.In an interview on 09/22/2025 at 11:00 AM, Staff D, Resident Care Manager/LPN, said the PPD solution vial in the East Hall medication room refrigerator should have been labeled with the date it was opened.In an interview on 09/25/2025 at 9:53 AM, Staff C, Director of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-11-18 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure opened resident food items were labeled and dated in 1 of 2 nourishment refrigerators (West Hall) reviewed for food storage. This failure placed residents at risk for food borne illness, and a diminished quality of life. Finding included .Review of the facility's policy titled, Food: Safe Handling for Foods from Visitors, revised dated 01/2023, documented, When food items are intended for later consumption, the responsible facility staff will: a. Ensure that the food is stored separate or easily distinguishable from the facility food. b. Ensure that foods are in a sealed container to prevent cross contamination. c. Label foods with the resident's name and current date.During an observation on 09/25/2025 at 10:15 AM, in the [NAME] Hall nourishment refrigerator/freezer, two opened Tillamook ice cream containers, one with Chocolate Peanut Butter and another with Tillamook Mudslide, were not sealed and appeared to have several scoops…
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 · D2025-11-18 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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 offer the pneumococcal vaccine (a vaccination used to help prevent certain bacterial infections such as pneumonia, an infection of the lungs), and/or provide information and education regarding risks, benefits, and potential side effects associated with the vaccine, for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident 42) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This failure placed residents at risk for developing pneumonia, related complications, and a diminished quality of life. Findings included. Record review of the facility's policy titled, Vaccination of Residents Policy and Procedure, revised 12/2022, documented, All residents will be offered vaccines that aid in preventing infectious diseases unless the vaccine is medically contraindicated or the resident has already been vaccinated.Prior to receiving vaccinations, the resident or legal representative will be provided information and education regarding the benefits and potential side effects 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 · D2025-11-18 · tag F0887 — isolatedEducate residents and staff on COVID-19 vaccination, offer the COVID-19 vaccine to eligible residents and staff after education, and properly document each resident and staff member's vaccination status.
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 offer the Covid-19 (Coronavirus disease 2019, an infectious respiratory illness caused by a virus) vaccine and/or provide information and education regarding risks, benefits, and potential side effects associated with the vaccine, for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident 42) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This failure placed residents at risk for contracting Covid-19 infections, related complications, and a diminished quality of life.Findings included. Record review of the facility's policy titled, Vaccination of Residents Policy and Procedure, revised 12/2022, documented, All residents will be offered vaccines that aid in preventing infectious diseases unless the vaccine is medically contraindicated or the resident has already been vaccinated.Prior to receiving vaccinations, the resident or legal representative will be provided information and education regarding the benefits and potential side effects of the vaccinations.All new residents shall…
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 · D2025-08-14 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
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 were free from misappropriation of property for 1 of 4 sampled residents (Resident 1), reviewed for misappropriation. This failure resulted in Resident 1's funds being misappropriated and placed residents at risk for financial exploitation and diminished quality of life.Findings included.Record review of the facility policy titled, Prevention and Reporting: Resident Mistreatment, Neglect, Abuse, Including Injuries of Unknown Source, and Misappropriation of Resident Property, dated 08/2022 showed, A resident has the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation as defined below. This includes but is not limited to freedom from corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion and any physical or chemical restraint not required to treat the resident's medical symptoms. Accordingly, the center prohibits the abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of resident property by…
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.
- 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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to CALDERA CARE — 6 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 | 5 of 5 | 2.8 | +2.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 5 of 5 | 2.7 | +2.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 3.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.0 | ≈ chain avg |
The other 5 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.8★, 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 | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| KH7 HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 05/21/2025 |
| KH7 HH CDW | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/21/2025 |
| KH7 OPS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/21/2025 |
| OSCHEROWITZ, RAPHAEL | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/21/2025 |
| WOLMARK, CHAIM | Individual | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 05/21/2025 |
| 1305 ALEXANDER PROPCO, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/21/2025 |
| HOGUE, ASHLEY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/18/2014 |
| MCDANIEL, PAULINE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/24/2023 |
| KH7 PROPCO HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/21/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 18 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
5 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.
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 505536. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-18, 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.