Mountain View Rehabilitation And Care Center
5925 47th Avenue NE, Marysville, WA 98270 · For profit - Corporation · 82 certified beds · (360) 659-1259 Medicare & Medicaid certified
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (29% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- a high number of inspection citations overall (36) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 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 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 5.6% | 14.2% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.6% | 5.5% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.3% | 1.0% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.4% | 1.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 24.0% | 17.7% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.1% | 2.6% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 9.4% | 17.2% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 9.8% | 12.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.0% | 93.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.3% | 4.3% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 24.0% | 22.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 17.1% | 15.1% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.7% | 1.3% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 85.1% | 82.0% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 24.7% | 19.9% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.6% | 13.4% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.39 | 1.33 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.47 | 1.52 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
57.0% 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 92 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 51.3% 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 39 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 0.40 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 69% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 19% 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 | 57.0%CMS range 45.7–69.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.0%CMS range 7.0–14.5 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 51.3% | 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 | 66.7% | 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 | 64.1% | 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 | 88.3% | 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 | 100.0% | 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. | — | ||
| 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 | 6.7% | 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 | 7.0%CMS range 3.8–10.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.07 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 82 beds and averages 83.8 residents a day — about 102% occupied, or roughly -2 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 3.76 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.96 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.09 is below 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 3.35 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.92 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.07 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
36 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 26 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-12 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her 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 honor resident rights related to providing care and treatment for chemotherapy for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 36). This failure placed residents at risk of unmet medical needs, emotional upset, and diminished quality of life. Findings included.<RESIDENT 36>Resident 36 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses to include malignant extensive stage lung cancer (end stage lung cancer has spread to other parts of the body) and metastasis to liver (cancer has spread to the liver). According to the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS-an assessment tool) assessment, dated [DATE], the resident was cognitively intact. In an interview on [DATE] at 1:49 PM, Resident 36 stated they were supposed to have chemotherapy, but the facility told them they did not take care of residents with chemotherapy and did not provide transportation for chemotherapy. In an interview on [DATE] at 2:43 PM, Resident 36 stated they were not aware they could…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-12 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents received the necessary care and services to attain or maintain their highest practicable level of well-being for 2 of 2 residents (Resident 82 and 94) reviewed for quality of care. These failures placed all residents at risk of developing wounds, worsening wounds and other skin conditions and diminished care. Findings included.<COMPRESSION STOCKINGS>Resident 82 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include history of stroke, history of falling, and orthostatic hypotension (a form of low blood pressure that happens when standing after sitting or lying down). Review of Resident 82's Medication Administration Record (MAR) from 01/01/2026 through 01/06/2026 showed a physician's order dated 01/02/2026 directing nursing staff to apply compressing stockings to both their lower extremities in the morning and remove at night for orthostatic hypotension. During an observation on 01/06/2026 at 11:48 AM Resident 82 was observed lying…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-12 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure developed interventions (fall mats and call lights) were in place to minimize the risk for injury during a fall for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Residents 26) reviewed for accident hazards. This failure placed residents at risk for potential injury, negative outcomes and decreased quality of life.Findings included .Review of the facility policy titled, Fall Best Practice Guidelines dated 3/2016 documented the facility would:* Identify an action plan or approaches to be taken to prevent further falls based on newly identified facts or risk factors.* Update the resident Care Plan to reflect new action plans or approaches to prevent new falls. * Update resident care guide. * All residents will be reviewed at a minimum of two additional time by the fall intradisciplinary team weekly meetings to assess and document in the medical record whether the intervention had been successfully implemented or if further recommendations were required.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-12 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure treatment carts and medication carts were locked for 1 of 1 treatment carts (Treatment Cart 1) and 1 of 4 medication carts (Medication Cart C). These failures placed residents at risk for having access to treatment supplies and medication not prescribed to them, missing medication, and access to medication by unauthorized individuals. Findings included .<Unlocked Medication Cart C>On 01/05/2026 at 11:55 AM Medication Cart C was observed unlocked and unattended. Staff R, Registered Nurse, was observed to enter room [ROOM NUMBER]. Several facility staff walked by Medication Cart C while unlocked and unattended. Staff R returned to Medication Cart C at 11:58 AM.In an interview at 11:55 AM Staff R stated they had not realized their medication cart was left unlocked and locked the cart. Staff R stated the expectation was to have their medication cart locked when unattended to prevent anyone from taking medication and misusing it. <Unlocked Treatment…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-12 · tag F0838 — failed to assess facility resources and resident needs — isolatedConduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations (including nights and weekends) and emergencies.
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 the resources needed and provide the necessary care and services the resident requires during day to day operations according to the facility assessment (document describing resident population and needs to determine staff and other resources necessary to competently care for residents). The facility failed to provide care and treatment for chemotherapy for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 36). This failure placed residents at risk of unmet medical needs and delays in care, treatment and service needs. Findings included.Review of the facility's policy titled, Facility Assessment, 2025/2026, revised date 08/22/2025, documented the facility is licensed to provide care for 82 residents. The actual maximum number of residents allowable may be less at times to accommodate for safe resident care needs (e.g., infection isolation). The facility assessment documented Services and Care we offer based on Residents' needs included Cancer Treatments…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-12 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a system in which resident's records were complete, accurate, and accessible, for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 36) reviewed for accurate and complete medical records. The facility failed to ensure the residents' medical records contained weekly laboratory results and accurate documentation about appointments placed residents at risk for medical complications, unmet care needs, and for diminished quality of life. Findings included .<APPOINTMENTS>Review of an oncology clinic note dated 10/16/2025 at 11:04 AM, documented Resident 36 scheduled an appointment on 10/29/2025 at 2 PM. Review of the facility providers' notes dated 10/21/2025 at 9:39 AM, 10/24/2025 at 8:52 AM, documented to follow up with oncologist (cancer specialist) on 10/29 at 2 PM.Review of an oncology clinic note dated 10/29/2025 at 2:24 PM, Resident 36 was no show for the visit, and the clinic was not notified of the reason.Review of Resident 36's Electronic Medical Record (EMR) on…
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 · D2025-05-30 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to notify the responsible party when a medication order had been changed for 1 of 1 (Resident #1) residents reviewed for a change of condition. The failure to not inform the resident representative of a high-risk medication change placed them at risk not to be informed of the risks and benefits and violated a resident right to be involved in health care decision making. Findings included . Review of a facility policy titled, Notification-Physician or Responsible Party, revised date May 2016, showed that the responsible party was to be notified if there was a change in resident's treatment and the notification was to be made within 24 hours. Definitions: - Antipsychotic medication- a class of psychiatric medications used to treat psychosis and affect a person's mood, thinking and behavior. Side effects can cause drowsiness. - Psychosis- a state where a person loses touch with reality, often experiencing hallucinations (seeing or hearing things that aren't…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-01-09 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
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 maintain a safe, clean, and homelike comfortable environment. The facility failed to provide necessary housekeeping and maintenance of resident rooms, bathrooms, and hallways; failed to ensure comfortable sound levels were maintained, failed to ensure resident rooms were individualized with items to provide a homelike environment, and failed to ensure residents were afforded adequate living space. These failures placed residents at risk for a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled homelike environment dated 2024 showed the facility staff and management shall maximize, to the extent possible, the characteristics of the facility that reflect a personalized, homelike setting. These characteristics include: Cleanliness and orderly environment in rooms Privacy Curtains. Comfortable (minimum glare) yet adequate (suitable to the task) lighting; Inviting colors and décor; Personalized furniture 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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-01-09 · tag F0636 — patternAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI), an assessment of a resident's needs, strengths, goals, and preferences, were completed within the required timeframes and/or included thorough summaries of the Care Area Assessments (CAA's), an assessment of a specific resident care or medical issue, to holistically analyze the plan of care for 9 of 22 residents ( 4, 5, 20, 55, 51, 62, 66, 70 and 179) reviewed for comprehensive assessments. This failure placed the residents at risk of not having appropriate services provided based on the resident's individualized needs and placed all other residents at risk of their needs and preferences not met. Findings included . Review of the facility's policy, Resident Assessment and Associated Processed, revised/reviewed August 2024, showed CAA's will be made of the residents needs, strengths, goals, life history and preferences using the RAI and will include at least the following: Identification and demographic…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-01-09 · tag F0645 — patternPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) accurately reflected the current status for two of seven residents (Residents 45 and 50) and failed to ensure two of seven residents (Resident 5 and 56) were referred for level two evaluations. These failures placed the residents at risk for inappropriate placement and not receiving timely and necessary services to meet mental health care needs. <RESIDENT 50> Resident 50 admitted to the facility 11/01/2023 with diagnoses that included depression and Klinefelter Syndrome (genetic condition in which a male has an extra X chromosome which may delay developmental milestones). In a review of Resident 50's provider progress note dated 11/02/2023 showed they had a diagnosis of depression and was taking an psychoactive (medication that can alter thoughts/behaviors) medication for treatment. In a review of Resident 50's care plan, dated 11/06/2023, showed they were prescribed a medication to treat…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 26 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-01-09 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure three (5, 20, and 50) of six residents reviewed for unnecessary medications, staff failed to followed provider orders in regard to weights and blood sugar (the amount of glucose in your blood) monitoring. These failures placed residents at potential risk of a decline in medical status and quality of life-related to unmet care needs. Findings included . <BOWEL MONITORING> <RESIDENT 20> Resident 20 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident 20's physician's orders showed the resident received Milk of Magnesia (laxative), twice daily and Docusate Sodium (stool softener) once a day for constipation. Review of Resident 20's bowel record showed the resident had no bowel movements (BM) from 12/29/2024 at 9:51 PM until 01/06/2025 at 9:59 PM. Review of Resident 20's progress notes from 12/29/2024 through 01/09/2025 showed no documentation about the constipation, abdominal assessment, or new order for Lactulose (laxative) twice daily ordered…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-01-09 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — patternImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure adequate indications for use of an antipsychotic medication (medications that affect the mind or behavior) for 3 of 6 residents (Residents 5, 179 and 380), failed to ensure residents were monitored for adverse consequences of psychotic medication use for 2 of 6 residents (Residents 45 and 380), failed to ensure behaviors were monitored for 2 of 6 residents (Residents 45 and 380) and failed to obtain consents timely for 1 of 6 residents (Resident 179) reviewed for unnecessary medications. These failures put the residents at risk for experiencing adverse side-effects from unnecessary medication use. Findings included . As referenced in the Food and Drugs/Drug (FDA) Safety Information, anti-psychotic medications have serious side effects and can be especially dangerous for elderly residents. The use of anti-psychotic medications without an adequate rationale, or for the sole purpose of limiting or controlling expressions or…
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 · D2025-01-09 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess 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 3 sampled residents (Resident 229) reviewed for hospice services. Failure to identify and complete a Significant Change in Status (SCSA) assessment placed residents at risk for inadequate care planning and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument, User's Manual, V1.19.1, dated October 2024, showed that a SCSA was required to be performed within 14 days when a resident enrolled in a hospice program. Review of the facility policy titled, Resident Assessment and Associated Process, revised August 2024, showed significant change in status assessments must be completed within 14 days of identification. Resident 229 admitted on [DATE] and were not receiving hospice services. Review of a Hospice Certification and Plan of Care showed Resident 229 elected their hospice benefit on 12/20/2024. Review of Resident 229's Minimum Data Set…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-09 · 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 ensure a resident with a hearing impairment had a base line care plan developed and implemented to provide effective and person-centered care for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 380) reviewed for base line care plans. This failure placed residents at risk of not being informed of their initial plan for delivery of care and services and placed them at risk for unmet needs and possible complications. Findings included . Resident 380 admitted to the facility 12/26/2024, with diagnoses that included paranoid schizophrenia (chronic mental illness that affects a person's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors) and anxiety. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment (an assessment tool), dated 01/01/2025, showed the resident had mild cognition impairment and had moderate difficulty hearing with no devices. Review of Resident 380's nursing admission assessment dated [DATE], showed the resident had difficulty hearing with no devices to assist. Review of Resident 380's nursing…
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 · D2025-01-09 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to review and revise care plans for 1 of 3 residents for falls (179), and 1 of 5 residents for nutrition (20). The failure to review and revise care plans by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment placed the residents at risk for unmet care needs, feelings of boredom, agitation and a diminished quality of life. Findings included: Review of the facility policy titled, Fall Best Practice Guidelines dated 08/2024 showed a post fall assessment/evaluation including recommendations and care plan changes will be completed for all residents who have experienced a fall. The care plan will be completed/updated to include newly identified factors that may have contributed to the fall. The facility will develop an action plan or approaches to be taken in an attempt to prevent further falls based on newly identified facts or risk factors. The facility is to update the resident care guide. <RESIDENT 179> Resident 179 admitted [DATE] with diagnoses to include…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-09 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide assistance with 2 of 3 dependent residents including meal assistance for resident (4) and bathing for resident (179) reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL's). Facility failure to provide resident's, who were dependent on staff for assistance with hygiene including eating assistance 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, Activities of Daily Living , revised July 2015, showed the policy was that nursing assistants will provide assistance with ADL's based on the resident's individualized plan of care. These interventions will be on the Kardex, which Is accessed in Point of Care (POC). <RESIDENT 179> Resident 179 admitted [DATE] with diagnoses to include stroke with hemiparesis (inability to move one side of body) and hemiplegia (paralysis on one side of the body) neurocognitive…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-09 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 1 residents (Resident 45) reviewed for respiratory care. Failure to follow provider's orders for oxygen (O2) therapy placed the resident at risk for unmet needs, potential negative outcomes and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Oxygen Administration dated 05/2007, revised 04/2016; 07/2019 showed it was the policy of the facility that oxygen therapy is administered as ordered by the physician or as an emergency measure until the order could be obtained. Resident 45 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included pulmonary fibrosis (a lung disease that causes scaring in the lungs making it difficult to breathe) and congestive heart failure (CHF-a chronic condition in which the heart doesn't pump blood as quickly as the body needs). In an interview on 01/02/2025 at 2:12 PM Resident 45…
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 · D2025-01-09 · tag F0732 — isolatedPost nurse staffing information every day.
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 the daily nurse staffing form was accurately completed with actual hours worked for each shift for 5 of 6 days (01/02/2025, 01/03/2025, 01/06/2025, 01/07/2025, and 01/08/2025), reviewed for sufficient and competent staffing. This failure placed the residents and residents' representatives at risk of not being fully informed of the current staffing levels. Findings included . In observations on 01/02/2025 at 9:46 AM, 11:06 AM, 1:55 PM, and 3:05 PM, the facility's daily nursing staffing form posted did not show the actual hours worked for nursing staff. In observations on 01/03/2025 at 9:11 AM, 12:06 PM, and 2:48 PM, the facility's daily nursing staffing form posted did not show the actual hours worked for nursing staff. In observations on 01/06/2025 at 9:48 AM, 12:33 PM, and 3:02 PM, the facility's daily nursing staffing form posted did not show the actual hours worked for nursing staff. In observations on 01/07/2025 at 10:50 AM, and 2:27 PM, showed that the facility's daily nursing staffing form posted…
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 · D2025-01-09 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolatedEnsure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
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 address emotional and psychosocial well-being through assessment, care plan development and implementation for one of two residents (53), reviewed for individualized behavioral health needs. This failure placed residents at risk of unmet emotional and psychosocial health needs, unwanted behaviors, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included . Resident 53 admitted [DATE] with diagnoses which included a stroke and aphasia (effect of a stroke causing difficulty with verbal expression and/or comprehension) and dementia without behavioral disturbance. The resident's most recent entry following a hospitalization was 11/29/2024. According to the most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS- an assessment tool) assessment dated [DATE], showed Resident 53 did not participate in the cognitive interview documented as rarely or never understood, with short term and long-term memory problems, no verbal or physical behaviors directed toward others and no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-09 · 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 one of four medication carts had unsecured medications. In addition, the facility failed to ensure medications were secured and not accessible to residents for two of two (70 and 75) residents. These failures placed residents at risk for unauthorized access to medications and biologicals, and potential drug misuse. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Storage if Medications dated May 2022 showed Medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely, and properly, following manufacturer's recommendations or those of the supplier. The medication supply is accessible only to licensed nursing personnel, pharmacy personnel, or staff members lawfully authorized to administer medications. Review of the facility policy titled, Bedside Medication Storage effective May 2022 showed bedside medication storage is permitted for residents who wish to self-administer medications, upon the written order of the prescriber and once self-administration skills have been assessed and deemed appropriate in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-01-09 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure prompt dental services were provided for 2 of 3 sampled residents (Residents 33 and 56) reviewed for dental services. This failure placed residents at increased risk for continued dental problems, difficulty chewing, associated health complications, and diminished quality of life. Findings included . <RESIDENT 33> Resident 33 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. According to the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment of care needs) assessment, dated 02/13/2024, showed Resident 33 had obvious or likely cavity or broken natural teeth. In an interview and observation on 01/02/2025 at 10:34 PM, Resident 33 stated they had missing teeth, and their teeth hurt when eating and they needed to see a dentist. Observation showed Resident 33 only had two upper teeth and three lower teeth with some yellow-brownish debris on them. Review of Resident 33's current care plan with a focus area initiated on 05/16/2024 showed Resident 33 had…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-09 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff followed infection control procedures and practices for 1 of 2 residents (Resident 229) on enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) that were observed for care. The facility also failed to disinfect resident care equipment between resident use. These failures placed residents at risk of cross contamination and/or the spread of disease. Findings included . <ENHANCED BARRIER PRECAUTIONS> During an observation on 01/06/2025 at 8:16 AM, a sign was posted outside Resident 229's room [ROOM NUMBER] that instructed staff they must wear gloves and gown for high contact resident care activities to include dressing, transferring, changing briefs or assisting with toileting. The sign had an 'M' written on it. room [ROOM NUMBER] had three occupants. Review of Resident 229's care plan showed an intervention that the resident required EBP during high contact resident care activities, dated 01/03/2025. During an observation on 01/06/2025 at 1:28…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-11-01 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure appropriate interventions were used to prevent the spread of germs for 3 of 4 residents (Residents 1, 2, and 3) reviewed for wound care. Failure to change gloves and complete hand hygiene when indicated during incontinent care and wound care placed residents at risk for the transmission of germs, including the potential for a wound infection. Findings included . Review of an undated facility procedure for Infection Control practices during wound dressing changes showed gloves should be discarded and hand hygiene performed after the old dressing was removed and prior to the cleansing of wound or application of a new dressing. Review of the Centers for Disease Control Website article, titled Hand Hygiene for Healthcare Workers, dated February 27, 2024, showed hand hygiene should be performed: - Before donning gloves - When moving from a soiled body site to a clean body site - Immediately after glove removal <RESIDENT 1> During an observation of wound care on 10/30/2024 at 7:34 AM, Staff C, Licensed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-01 · 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow consultant recommendations for 1 of 2 residents (Resident 4) reviewed for wound clinic visits. Failure to follow up and/or implement consultant recommendations placed residents at risk of complications of health conditions. Findings included . Resident 4's most recent admission to the facility was on 05/30/2024. Review of a LN (licensed nurse) Skin evaluation, dated 09/25/2024, showed Resident 4 had wounds to the anterior (front) abdomen, right abdominal pannus (area of excess skin and fatty tissue), left buttock and right buttock. Review of Resident 4's wound clinic consult note, dated 10/09/2024, showed recommendations for treatment order changes to wounds as follows: 1. Anterior abdomen- apply skin prep daily for 1 week then discontinue. 2. Right abdominal pannus- cleanse wound with wound cleanser and gauze, treat around wound with skin prep, apply silicon barrier cream mix with antifungal powder to wound bed, cover with gauze and change every other day. 3. Right and Left buttock wounds-cleanse wound, treat…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-05-03 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — patternEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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 3 of 3 sampled residents (Residents 4, 2, and 5) reviewed for diabetes (disease where body does not use sugar effectively) remained free of significant medications errors related to the administration of insulin (high-risk medication for diabetes). Failure to administer insulin within the required time frame of one hour before/after the scheduled time parameter placed residents at risk of abnormal blood sugars (level of sugar in blood that is monitored for residents with diabetes). Findings included . Review of an undated facility policy titled, Medication Pass Times, showed medications ordered to be given before a meal should be administered 15 minutes to one hour before the scheduled mealtime. Review of the facility's mealtimes showed breakfast was to be served between 7:15 AM - 7:45 AM, lunch was to be served between 11:15 AM - 11:45 AM, and dinner was to be served between 4:15 PM - 5:00 PM. <RESIDENT 4> Resident 4 admitted to the facility on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-03 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for 3 of 5 sampled residents (Resident 1, 2, and 3) reviewed for admission orders. Failure to implement and follow physician prescribed orders on admission to the facility placed residents at risk of medical complications and a decline in health status. Findings included . <RESIDENT> 1 Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis of acute (comes on suddenly) and chronic (long term problem) respiratory failure (the respiratory system fails in one or both of its gas exchange functions), sleep apnea (condition where breathing stops during sleep) and lung disease. Review of the Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) transfer orders, dated 04/01/2024, showed Resident 1 was to have bipap (machine that provides air pressure to lungs to help someone breath better) during the night and when napping. Review of Resident 1's facility admission orders showed no order for 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-11-22 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff followed a physician's order with a prescribed oxygen (O2) flow rate (the amount of supplemental oxygen flowing over a certain length of time) and indication for use was completed for 2 of 8 sampled residents (Resident 275 and 222) and failure to ensure respiratory equipment and tubing was regularly cleaned and/or changed and dated for 6 of 8 sampled residents (Resident 275, 33, 42, 12, 225, and 222) reviewed for respiratory care. This failure placed the resident at potential risk for respiratory distress, respiratory infection, and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Oxygen Administration, revised 04/2016, stated oxygen therapy was administered as ordered by the physician or as an emergency measure until the order can be obtained and O2 tubing was to be replaced every seven days or when visible soiled. <RESIDENT 275> Resident 275 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with…
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 · E2023-11-22 · tag F0887 — patternEducate 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 — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff were provided education about COVID-19 (an infectious respiratory disease caused by a virus) vaccination for 2 of 4 staff (Staff J and K) reviewed for employee COVID-19 immunizations. Failure to educate staff regarding the risks, benefits, and potential side effects of Covid-19 vaccination placed the staff at risk for having insufficient information to make informed decisions. Findings included . Review of the facility staff roster, showed that Staff J, Nursing Assistant Registered (NAR), was hired on 09/04/2023, and Staff K, NAR, was hired on 09/07/2023. On 11/20/2023, documentation was requested from the facility that showed Staff J and Staff K had been provided education regarding the risks and benefits of the Covid-19 vaccine. During an interview on 11/21/2023 at 8:15 AM, Staff A, Administrator, reported the facility did not have any documentation that Staff J or Staff K had been provided education on Covid-19 vaccine. Refer to WAC 388-97-1780(1)(2)(d) .
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-22 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide 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 provide a written notice to the resident, resident's representative(s) and representative of the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman of an emergency transfer for 4 of 4 sampled residents (Residents 25, 45, 46, and 53) reviewed for hospitalizations. This failure did not afford resident and/or their representative to make informed decisions about transfers and prohibited access to an advocate who could inform resident/representative of their options and rights. This failure had the potential to affect all facility-initiated discharges. Findings included . <RESIDENT 25> Resident 25 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE]. A review of the resident's clinical records showed no evidence of documentation regarding any notification to the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman for the facility-initiated discharge/hospitalization. <RESIDENT 45> Resident 45 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE]. A review of the resident's clinical records…
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 · D2023-11-22 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff contacted the Level II evaluator for a Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR - a federally required screening of all individuals who has both an Intellectual Disability (ID) or Related Condition (RC) and a serious mental illness (SMI) prior to admission to a Medicaid-certified nursing facility or a significant change of condition) Level II assessment (an in-depth evaluation to determine whether the resident requires specialized rehabilitation services) for 1 of 6 residents (Resident 21) reviewed for PASRR. Failure to update the PASRR with a change in mental health condition placed the resident at risk of health and/or emotional decline related to a lack of professional evaluation to determine if mental health interventions were required. Findings included . Resident 21 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident 21's PASRR, dated 11/29/2022, showed the resident had no indicators of mental illness within the previous…
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 · D2023-11-22 · tag F0660 — isolatedPlan the resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a discharge plan addressed the discharge needs for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 71) reviewed for effective discharge planning. These failures placed the resident at risk of not having necessary medications available and for not having hospice care coordinated for after discharge. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Discharge and Transfer, dated February 2016, showed it was the policy of this facility to provide the resident with a safe organized structured transfer and/or discharge from the facility to include but not limited to a discharge home would promote and maintain the resident's medical, physical, and psychosocial well-being. Resident 71 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include chronic pain, methamphetamine (a stimulant drug) use, malnutrition, and failure to thrive (failure to thrive - happens when there is a loss of appetite, eating and drinking less than usual, and 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 · Dcited before2023-11-22 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, and interview, the facility failed to provide the necessary assistance with grooming (nail care) for 2 of 6 sampled residents (Resident 51 and 3) dependent on staff to ensure their needs were met per their individual preferences. The failed practice placed residents at risk for medical complications, poor quality of life and psychosocial harm. Findings included . <RESIDENT 51> Resident 51 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS - an assessment tool) assessment, dated 09/04/2023, showed Resident 51 required extensive assistance of one staff member for grooming/hygiene tasks. During an observation and interview on 11/15/2023 at 12:44 PM, Resident 51 was noted to have long fingernails with brown debris under their nails and the right fourth fingernail had a sharp jagged edge. Resident 51 stated they did not like their fingernails long and did not remember the last time the staff had cleaned or trimmed their nails. During an observation on 11/16/2023 at 10:03 AM,…
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 · D2023-11-22 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident 53) reviewed for Mobility/Limited Range of Motion (ROM), received appropriate treatment and services to prevent further decrease in ROM. This failure placed the resident at risk for development of contractures (joint becomes fixed in place) and further decline in ROM. Findings included . Review of the facility policy titled, Splinting/Device Management Program, revised on 05/2007, indicated the facility was to screen residents for a splinting/device program. Under the staffing section, the Occupational Therapist (OT) and Physical Therapist (PT) were responsible for screening, evaluation and providing splints/devices for individual residents, establishing a splinting restorative program and training of Restorative staff in the implementation of the program, and modifying and adjusting the splint/devices if needed. Review of the procedure section of the policy showed: -Obtain physician order for…
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 · D2023-11-22 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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 with indwelling urinary catheters (a hollow, partially flexible tube that collects urine from the bladder and leads to a drainage bag) received appropriate treatment and services to prevent catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs) for 2 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 45, and 48) reviewed for indwelling urinary catheter care/management. The facility failed to develop individualized plans for the prevention of CAUTIs including to develop individualized and specific clinical indications for changing the catheters and/or catheter bags. These failures placed residents with indwelling urinary catheters at an increased risk for UTI's and associated complications. Findings included . Review of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Guidelines for Prevention of Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infections, 2009, showed the following: Changing indwelling catheters or drainage bags at routine, fixed intervals is not recommended.…
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 · D2023-11-22 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure 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
Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary medications for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident 48) reviewed for unnecessary medications. Failure to re-evaluate the need for continued use of antibiotic medications placed residents at potential risk for use of unnecessary medications and/or have adverse side effects. Findings included . Review of the Center for Disease Control, The Core Elements of Antibiotic Stewardship for Nursing Homes, dated 2015, indicated studies have shown that 40-75% of antibiotics prescribed in nursing homes may be unnecessary or inappropriate. Harm from antibiotic overuse were significant for the frail and older adults receiving care in nursing homes. These harms included risk of serious diarrheal infections, increased adverse drug events and drug interactions, and colonization and/or infection with antibiotic-resistant organisms. Resident 48 was re-admitted to the facility following a hospital stay on 05/16/2023 with diagnoses to include osteomyelitis (inflammation of the bone usually due 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.
- No harm found · Bcited before2023-11-22 · tag F0655 — patternCreate 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 provide 5 of 10 sampled residents (Resident 71, 225, 33, 42, and 275) and/or their representatives with a summary of their baseline care plan with 48 hours of admission. This failure placed residents at risk of not being informed of their initial plan for delivery of care and services to work on resident specific goals. Findings included . Review of a facility policy titled, Comprehensive Person-Centered Care Planning, revised date 08/2017, showed the facility was to complete a baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission included information to provide person centered care. <RESIDENT 71> Resident 71 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the Electronic Medical Records (EMR), showed Resident 71 was provided a summary of their care plan on 09/30/2023. During an interview on 11/21/2023 at 12:32 PM, Staff A, Administrator, confirmed Resident 71 did not receive a summary of their care plan within 48 hours. <RESIDENT 225> Resident 225 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.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to THE ENSIGN GROUP — 342 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4 of 5 | 3.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 2.7 | +1.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
The other 341 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 341; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| PENNANT HEALTHCARE LLC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 12/01/2013 |
| BHUMKAR, NISHITA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/10/2025 |
| BODILY, BRANDON | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/01/2013 |
| BURNAM, SOON | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/17/2013 |
| FARNSWORTH, STEPHEN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/01/2024 |
| HOLMES, NATHAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/01/2025 |
| KEETCH, CHAD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 03/01/2011 |
| SATO, AMI | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 09/09/2024 |
| PORT, BARRY | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/10/2025 |
| CARETRUST GP LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2013 |
| CARETRUST REIT INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2013 |
| CTR PARTNERSHIP LP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2013 |
| ENSIGN SERVICES INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/01/2013 |
| TULALIP BAY HEALTH HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2013 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 19 rows in the source record cover these 14 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.
6 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 $871K 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
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 505407. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-12, 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.