Briarwood At Timber Ridge

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.

57.2% 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 34 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 54.2% 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 67% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% 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 45 beds and averages 42.5 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 2 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 4.64 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.97 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.95 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 4.06 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.87 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.08 to 0.69 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 29% 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 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.

19 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 9 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-12-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure 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, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure food was stored and prepared in accordance with professional standards of safety. The failure to ensure: (1) open foods were labeled and dated, (2) kitchen fan and ice machines were monitored and cleaned, and (3) kitchen garbage/trash receptacles were covered as required placed residents at risk for ingesting expired and/or contaminated food and the development of food-borne illness.Findings included .<Facility Policy>The facility policy titled, Food Receiving and Storage, revised 03/2024, showed foods would be received and stored in a manner that complied with safe food handling practices. The policy showed dry foods that were stored in bins and all foods stored in the refrigerator or freezer would be covered, labeled, and dated ( use by date) appropriately. The policy showed food services staff would maintain clean food storage and preparation areas at all times.<Dry Storage>Observation on 12/10/2025 at 8:18 AM with Staff G (Sous Chef) showed six bottles of assorted sauces and cooking condiments and…

  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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2025-12-16 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — widespread
  Keep all essential equipment working safely.
  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 essential equipment including the dishwasher, walk-in refrigerator, and freezer thermostat (a device that regulated a heating or cooling system to maintain a set temperature) located in the main central kitchen were maintained and kept in safe operating conditions. These failures placed the residents at risk for infection with using improperly sanitized dishes and utensils during meals, consuming foods stored in unsafe temperatures, and the development of foodborne illness.Findings included.<Facility Policy>The facility policy titled, Food Receiving and Storage, revised 03/2024, showed functioning of the refrigeration and food temperatures would be monitored at designated intervals throughout the day by the food and nutrition services manager or designee. The policy showed its monitoring would be documented according to state-specific requirements.The facility policy titled, Sanitization, revised 11/2022, showed dishwashing machines were operated according to the manufacturer's instructions. The policy…

  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.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-16 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to develop, implement and/or ensure residents' comprehensive care plans accurately reflected care needs for 2 of 12 (Residents 26 & 15) residents reviewed for care planning. These failures placed residents at risk for unidentified and/or unmet care needs, medical complications and a diminished quality of life.Findings included .<Resident 26>According to the 10/21/2025 admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 26 had clear speech, impaired memory, and was assessed to require substantial/maximal assistance from staff with grooming/personal hygiene.Review of the revised 10/20/2025 Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Care Plan (CP) showed Resident 26 needed assistance with their ADLs as they were unable to perform them independently. The CP did not show Resident 26 needed substantial/maximal assistance with their grooming/personal hygiene as assessed in their MDS.On 12/10/2025 at 10:36 AM, Resident 26 was observed with facial hair/stubbles, bushy eyebrows, and long unkempt hair. There were white…

  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 · D2025-12-16 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
  Develop 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

  Based on observations, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure Care Plans (CPs) were updated and/or revised as needed to reflect person-centered care for 3 (Resident 3, 14, & 6) of 12 residents whose CPs were reviewed. These failures left residents at risk for inappropriate care, unmet care needs, and other negative health outcomes. Findings included.<Facility Policy> Review of the facility's Care Plans policy, revised 03/2022, showed CPs would be revised as information about the resident and/or the resident's condition changed. <Resident 3> According to the 10/03/2025 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS – an assessment tool), Resident 3 was able to make their needs known, had memory loss, clear speech, could make themself understood and usually could understand others. The MDS showed Resident 3 had limited range of motion to one leg, used a walker or wheelchair, and required moderate assistance with toileting, bathing, dressing, and personal hygiene. Observations made on 12/10/2025 at 9:25 AM ,12/11/2025 at 9:32 AM, and 12/15/2025 at 11:15 AM showed Resident 3 in a…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-16 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  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 non-pharmaceutical interventions were in place, pain medications had parameters for residents receiving multiple pain medications, physician's orders were clarified, and staff followed post dialysis orders for 3 (Residents 8, 3 & 18) of 12 residents whose orders were reviewed. These failures placed residents at risk for ineffective treatments, medication errors, and delayed treatments.Findings included.<Pain Medication Parameters & Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions> <Resident 8> According to the 10/13/2025 Comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), Resident 8 was able to make their needs known, had memory impairment, had clear speech, was able to understand and be understood by others. The MDS showed Resident 8 had diagnoses including an upper arm fracture, pain, and muscle spasms. The MDS showed Resident 8 was assessed with occasional pain that interfered with therapy activities and activities of daily living. Review of the at risk for pain due to a left arm fracture care plan, revised…

  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 · D2025-12-16 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who were dependent on staff for assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) received the assistance they required for 3 (Residents 14, 26, & 15) of 3 residents and 1 (Resident 3) supplemental resident reviewed for assistance with ADLs. The failure to provide assistance with putting on compression stockings, eating assistance, and grooming/personal hygiene left residents at risk for embarrassment, poor hygiene, and other negative health outcomes.Findings included.<Facility Policy>According to the facility's Activities of Daily Living policy, revised 03/2018, care and services would be provided to residents who were unable to carry out ADLs independently. Staff would provide appropriate support and assistance with hygiene, mobility, using the restroom, dining, and communication. <Resident 3> According to the 10/03/2025 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS – an assessment tool), Resident 3 was able to make their needs known, had memory loss, and required moderate staff assistance with toileting,…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-16 · 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

  Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure 3 (Resident 5, 8, & 7) of 12 residents reviewed received the necessary care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice. The facility failed to ensure residents with diabetes (disease in which the body fails to control blood sugar levels) received appropriate monitoring and had orders in place for emergent changes in blood sugar levels for 1 (Resident 5) of 1 diabetic residents, failed to implement skin preventative measures for 1 (Resident 8) of 12 residents reviewed, and failed to follow the facility bowel protocol for 1 (Resident 7) of 12 residents reviewed. These failures placed all residents at risk for unmet care needs, uncontrolled diabetes, skin breakdown, prolonged constipation, pain, and a diminished quality of life. Findings included .<Facility Policy>According to the facility Diabetes- Clinical Protocol, policy revised 03/2025 showed residents prescribed insulin would have their blood glucose monitored three to four times daily. The policy showed the facility would…

  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 · D2025-12-16 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
  Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a licensed pharmacist's monthly Medication Regimen Reviews (MRRs) were completed monthly and recommendations were reviewed and acted upon for 2 (Resident 3 & 5) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. This failure placed all residents at risk for delays in necessary medication changes and at risk for adverse side effects. Findings included . <Facility Policy> According to the facility's Medication Regimen Review policy, revised 03/01/2017, the facility would maintain each resident's highest practicable level of functioning by helping them utilize medication appropriately and prevent or minimize adverse consequences related to medication therapy. The pharmacist would provide the facility Director of Nursing and the Medical Director with a written, signed, and dated copy of the report, listing the irregularities found and recommendations for their solutions.<Resident 3>Review of a 10/03/2025 Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool), showed Resident 3 was able to make their needs known,…

  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 · D2025-12-16 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard 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 maintain complete and accurate medical records for 2 (Residents 34 & 3) of 12 residents whose records were reviewed. Staff failure to include interdisciplinary team notes from behavior meetings including physician documentation regarding Gradual Dose Reduction (GDR) decisions placed residents at risk for unmet care needs and risk for receiving unnecessary psychotropic medications.Findings included.<Resident 34> Review of Resident 34's 09/24/2025 Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS – an assessment tool) showed the resident had diagnoses including anxiety and depression. The MDS showed Resident 34 received an antianxiety and antidepressant medications during the assessment period. Review of Resident 34's 12/12/2025 order summary showed a 07/172024 physician's order directing staff to administer an antianxiety medication three times per day to the resident. A 09/30/2025 physician's order directed staff to administer an antidepressant medication to Resident 34…

  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 · Ecited before2024-10-25 · tag F0623 — pattern
  Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
  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 by which residents received required written notices at the time of transfer/discharge, or as soon as practicable for 2 (Residents 43 & 30) of 4 residents reviewed for hospitalizations. Failure to ensure written notification to the resident and/or the resident's representative of the reasons for the discharge in writing and in a language and manner they understood, placed residents at risk for a discharge that was not in alignment with the resident's stated goals for care and preferences. Findings included . <Facility Policy> According to the facility's Transfer or Discharge, Facility Initiated policy, revised 10/2022, the facility would provide a notice of transfer as soon as practicable to residents who were transferred emergently to an acute care setting. This policy showed the notice would be provided in a manner the resident could understand. The notice would include the reason, effective date, location, and an explanation 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to LIFE CARE SERVICES — 43 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 27 rows in the source record cover these 21 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

13 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 $8.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 22% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

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