Olympia Transitional Care And Rehabilitation
430 Lilly Road Northeast, Olympia, WA 98506 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 113 certified beds · (360) 491-9700 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0569)
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (42) — 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 | 3 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 | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 5 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 | 17.7% | 14.2% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.5% | 5.5% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 1.0% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 2.6% | 1.6% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 17.5% | 17.7% | 6.5% | typical for the state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.2% | 2.6% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 12.4% | 17.2% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 13.1% | 12.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.8% | 93.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.7% | 4.3% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 23.1% | 22.5% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 25.3% | 15.1% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.5% | 1.3% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 90.2% | 82.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 15.1% | 19.9% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 8.6% | 13.4% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.31 | 1.33 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.85 | 1.52 | 1.80 | typical |
‡ 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.
60.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 308 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 75.8% 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 149 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 0.62 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 89% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 24% 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 | 60.8%CMS range 55.9–66.7 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 8.5%CMS range 6.0–11.6 | 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 | 75.8% | 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 | 77.8% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 71.8% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 97.2% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 96.9% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 97.6% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 5.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.9%CMS range 4.9–9.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.14 | 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 113 beds and averages 80.1 residents a day — about 71% occupied, or roughly 33 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.24 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.61 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.64 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.78 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.42 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.68 to 0.43 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 42% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
42 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 31 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2024-05-22 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were free from avoidable accidents for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 1) reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs-such as bed mobility, toileting, eating, and transferring) and accidents. This failure placed residents at risk for injury and diminished quality of care. Resident 1 experienced harm when facility staff did not follow resident's individualized care plan (CP) and use two people for bed mobility during incontinence care, resulting in a fall from the bed and a broken leg. Findings included POLICY Review of the facility's Policy/Procedure - Activities of Daily Living policy, revised 07/2015, showed nursing assistants would provide assistance with ADLs based on the resident's individualized care plan and in accordance with professional standards of quality and clinical practices. <Resident 1> Review of the 12/21/2023 quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS-assessment tool) showed Resident 1 had no cognition problems,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-04-24 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — patternHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
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 interviews and record review the facility failed to honor a resident's choice for a room change for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident 80) reviewed for resident rights. The facility's failure placed theses residents at risk of not exercising their resident rights, loss of autonomy, and a diminished quality of life.Findings included. Resident 80 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set, MDS-an assessment tool, dated 02/24/2026, documented Resident 80 was cognitively intact. On 04/22/2026 at 8:56 AM, Resident 80 stated, They wanted me to move into this room. They did not give me a choice. I told them I liked the old room better. A review of Resident 80's census in the electronic health records (EHR) showed Resident 80's location on 08/28/2025 was room [ROOM NUMBER]-2 and on 11/03/2025 Resident 80's location was 314-2. A review of Resident 80's EHR showed a nursing progress note, dated 09/29/2025 at 11:18 AM by Staff P, Licensed Practical Nurse Supervisor, that said Resident 80…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-04-24 · tag F0628 — patternProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure transfer and discharge notifications to the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman (patient advocate for all residents in the nursing home) were accurate and/or contained the required copy of the notice for the transfer/discharge provided to residents/representatives, and/or that the facility maintained documentation of the transfer with the required information to be communicated to the receiving health care institution/provider for 5 of 5 residents (Residents 9, 8, 4, 84 & 86) reviewed for hospitalization and discharge. This failure placed residents at risk of lack of advocacy and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . The facility's monthly notifications to the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman were reviewed for [DATE], February 2026, and [DATE]. All months reviewed showed the resident return columns (expected or not expected) did not match the discharged to columns (acute care, psychiatric care, home, adult family…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-04-24 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure services provided met professional standards of practice by ensuring nursing staff followed physicians orders, had accurate documentation, and/or by ensuring medications were observed to be taken by residents for 6 of 19 sampled residents (Resident 4, 2, 7, 3, 54 & 65) reviewed for nursing care. These failures placed residents at risk for medication errors, delay in treatment, and adverse outcomes.Findings included .Resident 4 Resident 4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A provider order, dated 04/13/2026, directed licensed nurses to provide diabetic nail care every seven days and as needed. Resident 4's diabetes care plan, initiated 09/25/2025, also showed weekly nail care would be provided by the licensed nurse. On 04/21/2026 at 9:17 AM and 04/23/2026 at 11:13 AM, the toenails to the second, third and fourth digits of Resident 4's left foot were thick, yellow, untrimmed and were curved around the end of the toes to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-04-24 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — patternEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure pharmacy recommendations were either addressed or implemented for 3 of 5 sampled residents (Residents 3, 6 & 14) reviewed for unnecessary medications. These failures placed residents at risk for medication errors, adverse side effects, and a decreased quality of life.Findings included.Resident 3 Resident 3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of Resident 3's orders, showed PreserVision 2 capsules one time a day for supplement, dated 02/16/2026. Review of Resident 3's pharmacy Consultation Report, dated 03/02/2026, showed the pharmacist documented Resident 3's PreserVision Capsule should not be crushed when administered via feeding tube. The pharmacist recommended discussing with the provider the need for alternative therapy. On 04/23/2026 at 3:07 PM, Staff P, Licensed Practical Nurse/ Supervisor, while looking at the pharmacy consultation, said this may have been an oversite, they should have discussed it with the doctor and possibly…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-04-24 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — patternEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow medication parameters (provider instructions of when to hold or give a medication) and/or ensure nonpharmacological (non-medication) interventions were in place/documented on/observed for 3 of 6 residents (Resident 85, 6, and 7) reviewed for unnecessary medications. These failures resulted in residents receiving unnecessary medications and placed them at risk of hypotension (low blood pressure), falls, injuries and other medical complications. Findings included .Resident 85 Resident 85 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident 85 had a diagnosis of hypertension (high blood pressure). The Medicare 5-Day Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool), dated 11/18/2025, documented that Resident 85 was moderately cognitively impaired. Resident 85 had the following provider orders with hold parameters:1) Amlodipine Besylate, one time a day related to hypertension. Hold for SBP (systolic blood pressure, the top number in a blood pressure reading)…
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 · D2026-04-24 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
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, the facility failed to obtain consent from residents and/or resident representatives prior to implementing medical devices that potentially restrained movement and/or before administering psychotropic (mind altering) medication for 3 of 6 residents (Resident 7, 4 & 14) reviewed for right to be informed about treatment decisions. The failure to explain the risks and benefits associated with proposed medical devices and psychotropic medications in advance, detracted from the ability to make informed decisions about the proposed medical care/treatment, and prevented residents/resident representatives from exercising their right to decline the proposed care before it was implemented.Findings included .Resident 7 Resident 7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool), dated 04/05/2026, showed the resident was moderately cognitively impaired, had a diagnosis of depression and received antidepressant 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 · D2026-04-24 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolatedPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 2 of 5 residents (Residents 7 and 14) reviewed for unnecessary medications, were free of chemical restraints. The failure to ensure residents receiving psychotropic medications (drugs that affect behavior, mood, thoughts and perception) had identified target behaviors that were monitored and documented when observed, non-drug interventions were attempted prior to administration of as needed (PRN) psychotropic medications, and PRN psychotropic medication orders did not exceed 14 days, unless a clinical rationale was documented in the residents record by the provider. These failures placed residents at risk of receiving unnecessary psychotropic medications, experiencing adverse side effects such as sedation, a decline in physical function, and other potential negative health outcomes. Findings included . Resident 7Resident 7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool), dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-24 · 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 observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to ensure resident care plans (CPs) were reviewed, revised, and accurately reflected residents' care needs for 4 of 19 sample residents (Resident 4, 2, 7, & 40) whose care plans were reviewed. These failures placed residents at risk for unmet care needs and diminished quality of life.Findings included .Resident 4Resident 4 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The 5-day Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool), dated 04/15/2026, showed the resident received intravenous (IV) medication(s) via a central line (a type of IV access that reaches a large central vein in the body) during the assessment period. Review of the hospital transfer paperwork, dated 04/13/2026, showed Resident 4 re-admitted with a central line to the right upper chest and orders for IV vancomycin (antibiotic) every other afternoon for bacteremia (bacteria in the blood). Review of the comprehensive care plan, initiated 09/25/2025, showed no care plan had been developed…
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 before2026-04-24 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide bowel care in accordance with provider orders and the facility's bowel protocol for 2 of 7 residents (Resident 3 & 7) reviewed for bowel management. This failure placed residents at risk for abdominal pain/discomfort, decreased appetite and other potential health complications.Findings included. Per the facility policy, titled Bowel Protocol, Revised 03/2026:1. Administer Miralax 17gm dissolved in 8 oz fluid as needed if no bowel movement after 3 days2. If the resident does not have a bowel movement after Miralax is given, administer Dulcolax 10mg suppository rectally as needed if Miralax is ineffective and /or no bowel movement after four days3. If Miralax and Dulcolax are ineffective, the provider must be notified for further intervention.4. Document all efforts and interventions, including successful BM or on-going efforts to achieve the goal of a healthy bowel elimination5. With residents who have specialized bowel protocol to meet their…
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 · D2026-04-24 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 2 residents (Resident 40) reviewed for pressure ulcers (PU - injuries to the skin and the tissue below the skin that are due to pressure on the skin for a long time), was provided care and services consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing and prevent new pu formation. The failure to consistently implement preventative offloading measures residents were assessed to require placed residents at risk for further skin breakdown, prolonged wound healing and development of new avoidable PUs. Findings included . Resident 40 Resident 40 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the admission minimum data set (MDS, an assessment tool), dated 03/11/2026, showed the resident was cognitively intact, and admitted with a surgical wound and pressure injury to their feet. Review of the 03/07/2026 transfer paperwork showed Resident 40 had a surgical wound to the right heel after an incision and drainage was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 31 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-24 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolatedProvide appropriate foot care.
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 diabetic nail care was provided for 1 of 2 residents (Resident 4) reviewed for foot care. The failure to refer residents to a qualified specialist when staff were unable to meet a resident's diabetic foot/nail care needs, placed the resident at risk for ingrown toenails, foot ulcers, infection, pain/discomfort, and other medical complications associated with inadequate of diabetic foot care.Findings included .Resident 4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A provider order, dated 04/13/2026, directed licensed nurses to provide diabetic nail care every seven days and as needed. Resident 4's diabetes care plan, initiated 09/25/2025, also showed weekly nail care would be provided by the licensed nurse. Observations on 04/21/2026 at 9:17 AM and 04/23/2026 at 11:13 AM, showed Resident 4 had a right above knee amputation and the fifth digit (pinky toe) on the right foot had been amputated. Resident 4 indicated the amputations were due…
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 · D2026-04-24 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate and ordered fluids, within reach of the resident and at mealtimes, to maintain hydration for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident 60) when reviewed for hydration. This failure placed residents at risk for dehydration, medical complications and a diminished quality of life.Findings included. Resident 60 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with unspecified dementia (a syndrome characterized by a decline in cognitive function, affecting memory, thinking, behavior, and the ability to perform everyday activities). The Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool), dated 03/30/2026, documented Resident 60 was severely cognitive impaired and depended on staff for care. On 03/14/2026, Resident 60 was ordered to have a fortified diet (foods enhanced with additional vitamins, minerals, or other nutrients to improve overall nutritional intake and prevent deficiencies), with regular texture and thin liquids. Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-24 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — isolatedImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
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 implement an effective Antibiotic Stewardship Program, to promote appropriate use of antibiotics, reduce the risk of unnecessary antibiotic use and decrease the development of adverse side effects and antibiotic resistance for 3 of 5 residents (Residents 9, 96, & 3) when reviewed for antibiotic stewardship. This failure placed residents at risk for potential adverse outcomes associated with the inappropriate and/or unnecessary use of antibiotics.Findings included .Review of the facility policy titled, Antibiotic Stewardship, last revision/review date of 4/2025, documented Antibiotic Stewardship refers to a set of commitments and actions designed to optimize the treatment of infections while reducing the adverse events associated with antibiotic use. This can be accomplished through improving antibiotic prescribing, administration, and management practices thus reducing inappropriate use to ensure that residents receive the right antibiotic for 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 before2026-03-19 · 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 monitor the functioning of window alarms to prevent elopement for 1 of 20 residents (Resident 1) in a secure dementia unit. This failure placed residents at risk for elopement from the facility, injury and a diminished quality of life. Findings included.Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia (loss of memory, function, and overall thinking to the point where it disrupts daily living) with behavior disturbance and sensorineural hearing loss (permanent hearing loss). The Minimum Data Set (MDS), an assessment tool, dated 02/15/2026 showed Resident 1 was cognitively impaired, had shown behavior symptoms, wandering behaviors and required staff supervision for ambulation and most activities of daily living.Review of Resident 1's elopement/wandering evaluation, dated 02/09/2026, documented the resident was disoriented, ambulated independently or with supervision and had a score of 21 (High risk…
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 before2026-01-30 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
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 laboratory tests were completed as ordered for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 4) reviewed for quality of care. This failure placed the resident at risk of medical complications from lack of monitoring of medical conditions.Findings included.Review of the facility policy, titled Laboratory Testing, undated showed It is the policy of this facility to obtain laboratory and radiology services when ordered by a physician, PA [Physicians Assistant], NP [Nurse Practitioner] or clinical nurse specialist and to promptly notify the ordering entity of test results.Lab results and pending or missing lab results will be part of a change of shift report.Pending or missing lab results will be followed-up during daily clinical meeting.Resident 4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Parkinson's Disease and Hyperparathyroidism (occurs when 1 or more of the 4 parathyroid glands in the neck produce excessive parathyroid hormone [PTH], leading…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-01 · tag F0623 — patternProvide 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 the Ombudsman with transfer notification for 3 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 64, 71 & 16) reviewed for hospitalization. The failure to ensure required notifications were completed, prevented the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman (an advocacy group for individuals residing in nursing homes) the opportunity to educate residents and advocate for them regarding the discharge process. Findings included . Resident 64 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident 64 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] and returned to the facility on [DATE]. Resident 71 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident 71 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] and returned to the facility on [DATE]. Resident 16 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident 16 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE] and returned to the facility on [DATE]. On 03/31/2025 at 9:40 AM, documentation of the Ombudsman notification was requested from Staff D,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-01 · 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 routine assessment and monitoring of skin condition/injuries for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 331) reviewed for non-pressure skin, to provide bowel care in accordance with physicians' orders and facility protocol for 3 of 6 residents (Residents 67, 61 & 31) reviewed for bowel management, and to report dental pain for 1 of 2 residents (Resident 181) reviewed for dental care. These failures placed residents at risk for unidentified decline and/or delayed treatment of non-pressure skin conditions, abdominal pain, decreased appetite, other negative outcomes related to untreated constipation, and for untreated dental pain. Findings included . <Non-Pressure Skin> Review of the facility's Skin and Wound Monitoring and Management policy, revised 12/2023, showed a licensed nurses would assess non-pressure skin injuries that exist on a resident. These assessments would include measurements and a description of the nature, location and characteristics of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-04-01 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to fully operationalize an effective Infection Control and Prevention program when the facility failed to implement Infection Prevention and Surveillance Program (IPSP) to ensure line listings contained complete and accurate infection control data, with ongoing monitoring and analysis of infections and microorganisms for 2 of 2 months (January and February 2025) reviewed. Additionally, the facility failed to ensure staff performed hand hygiene, followed standard precautions (common sense practices to prevent the spread of infection in healthcare), enhanced barrier precautions (EBP, a set of infection control measures that use gowns and gloves to reduce the spread of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) and transmission based precautions used when someone has confirmed or suspected infections) for 3 of 4 residents (Residents 331, 16, & 31) reviewed for infection control. Additionally, the facility failed to have an adequate laundry sorting…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-01 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — patternImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
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 implement an antibiotic stewardship program that ensured complete and accurate information was collected (signs/symptoms, culture results etc.), evaluated to determine if McGeer's Criteria (tool for infection surveillance and antibiotic stewardship, criteria to show if antibiotics were indicated) was met, antibiotic use warranted, and providers were notified if criteria was not met or a microorganism was resistant to the current treatment for 3 of 3 residents (Residents 50, 31 & 335) reviewed for antibiotic use. These failures placed residents at risk for ineffective treatment of infections, development of multi-drug-resistant organisms, and other negative health outcomes. Findings included . During an interview on 03/26/2025 at 1:26 PM, Staff H, Infection Preventionist (IP), said the facility utilized revised McGeer's Criteria as their standardized tool for evaluating potential infections. Review of the facility's undated Statement of Leadership…
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 · D2025-04-01 · tag F0569 — isolatedNotify each resident of certain balances and convey resident funds upon discharge, eviction, or death.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident funds were transferred to the state office of financial recovery (OFR) within 30 days of death or discharge, for 1 of 1 discharged residents (Resident 332) reviewed for trust accounts. This failure resulted in delayed reconciliation of resident trusts. Findings included . Review of Resident 332's death in facility Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool), dated 12/23/2024, showed the resident was on Medicaid and discharged from the facility on 12/23/2024. Review of Resident 332's trust account ledger, showed a balance of $106.46 on 12/23/2024. On 04/01/2025 at 8:33 AM, a copy of the check for $106.46 sent to the OFR was requested. Staff L, Business Office Manager, reported that Resident 332's trust balance had not yet been conveyed (the act of legally transferring property from one entity to another) to the OFR. Reference WAC 388-97-0340(5) .
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-01 · 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 ensure care plans (CPs) were reviewed, revised, and accurately reflected resident care needs for 4 of 18 sample residents (Residents 331, 26, 67 & 71) whose CPs were reviewed. These failures placed residents at risk for unmet care needs, inappropriate care, and other negative health outcomes. Findings included . 1) Resident 331 admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a NPO (nothing by mouth) order secondary to dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). A nutrition care plan for Resident 331, initiated 03/14/2025, showed if the resident ate less than 50% of their meal, staff were to offer a meal replacement, and were to monitor and report to the physician any decrease in appetite. An at risk for falls care plan for Resident 331, initiated 03/14/2025, directed staff to keep needed items, water, etc., in reach. An antiplatelet therapy care plan for Resident 331, initiated 03/19/2025, directed staff to monitor for loss of appetite. An acute/chronic pain care…
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 before2025-04-01 · 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 <Documentation of Oral Care> Resident 331 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the admission MDS, dated [DATE], showed the resident had moderate cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff for oral care. On 03/26/2025 at 2:31 PM, Resident 331 reported they were provided oral care the previous evening for the first time since admission. Physicians' orders, dated 03/14/2025, showed Resident 331 was NPO (nothing by mouth) secondary to dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), and directed licensed nurses to provide Resident 331's oral care twice daily, once on day shift and once on evening shift. On 03/28/2025 at 10:29 AM, Resident 331 said they had not received oral care since the evening of 03/25/2025, as previously reported. The resident said staff informed them they had to wait for an order of toothettes to be delivered. On 03/28/2025 at 11:26 AM, Resident 331's assigned care giver Staff O, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), said they had not provided oral care to the resident. On 03/28/2025 at 11:26 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 · D2025-04-01 · tag F0661 — isolatedEnsure necessary information is communicated to the resident, and receiving health care provider at the time of a planned discharge.
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 anticipated for discharge were provided with a discharge summary, discharge plan, or discharge medications for 1 of 1 residents (Resident 79) reviewed for discharge. This failure placed residents at risk for an unsafe discharge, for complications related to not receiving medications, delay in treatment, and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Resident 79 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] for surgical aftercare, following surgery on the nervous system. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment, dated 12/13/2024, showed Resident 79 was cognitively intact. Review of Resident 79's discharge care plan, initiated on 09/12/2024, showed that at that time (admission) they wished to return to their one-story home with 2 stairs with rail at top step, had a 2-wheel walker, and had barriers of pain, surgical incision, and mobility. There was not a more up to date discharge care plan when reviewed. Review of Resident 79's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-01 · 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 ensure the provision of bathing and oral care for 1 of 2 dependent residents (Resident 331) reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). These failures placed residents at risk for poor hygiene, body odor, dental caries (cavities or tooth decay), a decreased self-worth and diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the facility's undated Partial-Bath policy showed residents could be bathed via shower, bed-bath or tub bath. They could also receive a partial bath on the days when full baths/showers were not provided. A partial bath consisted of washing the face, hands, underarms and groin. The policy instructed partial-baths should be provided every day that a shower/bed-bath/tub-bath was not provided. Resident 331 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool), dated 03/20/2025, showed the resident had moderate cognitive impairment, was dependent on staff for bathing 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 · Dcited before2025-04-01 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
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 ensure timeliness of laboratory [NAME] to include the reporting of critical lab results to the provider immediately for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 71) reviewed for hospitalization. This failure placed residents at risk for medical complications, hospitalization, delayed treatment, and diminished quality of life. Findings included . The facility policy titled Policy/Procedure - Nursing Clinical, revised 09/2024, documented Results of laboratory, radiological, and diagnostic tests outside the clinical reference ranges shall be reported to the resident's attending physician, PA [physician assistant], NP [nurse practictioner] or clinical nurse specialist promptly or as specified in the order. Call MD [doctor of medicine] immediately with any critical levels. Resident 71 admitted to the facility 02/12/2025. According to the Medicare 5-day Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool), dated 03/12/2025, Resident 71 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-04 · 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 complete wound care per physician's orders for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 2) reviewed for quality of care. This failure placed residents at risk for prolonged wound healing and infection. Findings included . Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including diabetes, orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation and peripheral vascular disease (condition reduces blood flow to arms, legs, or other parts of the body). The 5-day Minimum Data Set, an assessment tool, dated 07/30/2024, showed Resident 2 had cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff for bathing, toilet use and transfers. Resident 2's admission assessment, dated 07/23/2024, showed Resident 2 had a 21.5 centimeter surgical incision with staples. Review of a physician's order, dated 08/12/2024, showed the resident had a surgical incision to left knee to be cleaned with wound cleanser, skin prep applied and cover with a dry dressing daily and ace wrap every…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-27 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
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 timely laboratory (lab) services were provided for 2 of 3 residents (Resident 3 and 4) reviewed for lab services. This failure placed residents at risk for delayed identification and treatment of underlying health conditions, over or underdosing of medication and other potential negative outcomes. Findings included . Review of the undated facility policy, titled, Lab Test Results Protocol, showed incoming and outgoing nurses would review the lab book for any labs that were still pending and follow-up accordingly. <Resident 3> Resident 3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including aftercare following hip joint prosthesis, osteomyelitis (bone infection) of the left femur (thigh bone). The 5-day Minimum Data Set (MDS), an assessment tool, showed Resident 3 was cognitively intake, had no behaviors and was dependent on staff for personal hygiene, transfers and toileting. Resident 3's physician orders showed the following:…
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 before2024-05-22 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide 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 observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to provide timely toileting assistance for 7 of 9 Residents (Residents 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, & 9) and bathing services for 3 of 4 Residents (Residents 3, 4, & 11) reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). These failures placed the residents at risk for skin breakdown, discomfort, urinary tract infections, undignified quality of care, and diminished quality of life. Findings included . POLICY Review of the facility's Policy/Procedure-Activities of Daily Living policy, revised 07/2015, showed the facility would develop care plans (CP) for ADL's that were personalized with resident preferences for care such as day/time/type of bathing, waking time, bedtime, and any other quality of life choice that was important to the resident. The interventions provided to staff would be in accordance with professional standards of quality, clinical practice, and be on the [NAME] (simplified care plan) and accessible in the Point of Care (POC) electronic…
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 · D2024-03-25 · tag F0691 — failed to provide colostomy / ostomy care — isolatedProvide appropriate colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy care/services for a resident who requires such 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who required colostomy (surgically created opening in the bowel) care received services and care consistent with professional standards of practice and per physician orders for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 1) reviewed for quality of care. This failure placed residents at risk of having unrelieved pain, worsening skin conditions, and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia and surgical repair of the digestive system after a perforation and abscess (opening and spilling of bowel and infection into the abdominal cavity). The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 01/11/2024, documented the resident was cognitively impaired and indicated the resident had an ostomy. Resident 1's physician's order, dated 01/04/2024, documented an order for acetaminophen (medication to treat pain) 325 milligrams (mg) two tablets every six…
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 before2024-01-26 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — patternEnsure 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure services provided met professional standards of practice for 5 of 24 sampled residents (Residents 23, 177, 276, 128 and 129) reviewed. The failure to follow, obtain, and/or clarify incomplete or conflicting physicians' orders when indicated, placed residents at risk for medication errors and other potential negative outcomes. Findings included . <Resident 23> Resident 23 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of their current physician's orders showed: a) 09/19/2023 order for clonidine (blood pressure medication) with instruction to hold all blood pressure medications for a systolic blood pressure (SBP) less than or equal to 100. b) 10/05/2023 order for lisinopril/hydrochlorothiazide (a combination blood pressure and diuretic medication) with instruction to hold all blood pressure medications if the resident's SBP was less than or equal to 110. Review of Resident 23's January 2024 Medication Administration Records (MARs),…
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 · E2024-01-26 · tag F0694 — patternProvide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids 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 the external catheter length of Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters (PICC/ a long, thin tube that's inserted through a vein in the arm and passed through to the larger veins near the heart) were measured upon admission and at least weekly thereafter, for 3 of 3 residents (Resident 128, 129 & 276) reviewed for intravenous (IV) therapy. These failures detracted from staffs' ability to determine if the PICC was in the same position or had migrated and placed residents at risk for loss of vascular access, infection, and other potential negative outcomes. Findings included . Review of the facility's Central Venous Access Device (CVAD) Dressing Change policy, revised 06/01/2021, showed upon admission the external catheter length of a residents PICC must be measured as part of the initial assessment and then measured at least weekly. 1) Resident 128 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident 128's antibiotic therapy care…
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 · E2024-01-26 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than five percent when 2 of 2 nurses (Staff H & Staff G) did not correctly administer 3 of 31 medications in accordance with physician orders and/or manufacturer's guidelines for 2 of 3 residents (Residents 23 & 17) observed during medication pass. This resulted in a medication error rate of 9.68% percent. These failures placed residents at risk for ineffective treatment of underlying medical conditions and/or adverse side effects. Findings included . <Resident 23> On 01/24/2024 at 8:03 AM, Staff G, Registered Nurse (RN), took Resident 23's blood pressure and pulse. The systolic blood pressure (SBP) was 110 and pulse was 62. Staff G then administered the resident's lisinopril/hydrochlorothiazide (a combination blood pressure and diuretic medication) and clonidine (a blood pressure medication.) Review of Resident 23's January 2024 Medication Administration Record (MAR) showed the 10/25/2023 lisinopril/hydrochlorothiazide order instructed nursing to hold all blood pressure…
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 · E2024-01-26 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to maintain and document refrigerator temperatures for 2 of 3 facility refrigerators (Reach In & 500 Hall) reviewed for food service; failed to document dishwasher temperatures, and failed to discard expired beverages for 1 out of 1 beverage carts observed. These failures placed residents at risk of food-borne illness, unsanitary conditions, and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . <Refrigerator temperatures> On 01/24/2024 at 10:03 AM, review of the facility's refrigerator temperature logs, documented the Reach In and 500 Hallway refrigerators had multiple missing entries and documented temperatures outside the acceptable parameters for cold food holding: Dates over/missing temperatures for Reach In Refrig: degrees Fahrenheit (F) January 2024: 4th-42F; 19th-46F, 20th-45F. December 2023: 7th-46F, 8th-44F, 12th-46F, 13th-46, 15th-44F, 16th-44F, 26th-42F, 30th-46F. November 2023: 2nd-46F, 11th-44F, 23rd-42F, missing 30th. October 2023: 2nd-42F, 3rd-42F, 4th-43F, 5th-44F, 7th-48F, missing the 10th PM,…
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 · E2024-01-26 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard 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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident medical records were complete and accurate for 6 of 6 residents (Residents 177, 20, 51, 18, 54, & 277) reviewed for bowel management. The failure to accurately record resident bowel movements placed residents at risk for unidentified and/or unmet bowel care needs. Findings included . 1) Review of Resident 177's point of care charting (a charting software program) showed two separate areas were provided for staff to document resident bowel movements, one titled Bowel Movements (BM) and the other titled, Bowel Continence. Review of Resident 177's January 2024 BM flowsheet showed staff documented the resident had no BM on: 01/05/2024, 01/06/2024, 01/07/2024, 01/08/2024, 01/10/2024, 01/13/2024, 01/16/2024, 01/17/2024, 01/18/2024, 01/20/2024, 01/21/2024, 01/22/2024 and 01/24/2024. Review of Resident 177's January 2024 Bowel Continence flowsheet showed the resident had a BM daily with exception of 01/08/2024, 01/13/2024, 01/18/2024 and 01/242024. 2) Review of Resident 20's point of care charting showed two…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-26 · 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 observation and interview, the facility failed to respect and value the residents' private space by not knocking and/or announcing themselves for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident 6) reviewed for resident rights for dignity. This failure placed residents at risk for being treated with lack of dignity and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of policy entitled Dignity and Respect, dated April 2021, documented, Staff members shall knock before entering the Resident's room. Resident 6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool), dated 12/21/2023, showed Resident 6 was cognitively intact. On 01/22/2024 at 2:33 PM, Resident 6 said aides enter the room all the time without knocking. At 2:49 PM Staff F, Certified Nursing Assistant, entered Resident 6's room without knocking or announcing himself. When asked if entering without knocking was normal practice, Staff F stated, I'm sorry and existed the room. On 01/25/2024 at 11:38 AM, Staff C,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-26 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure visibly dirty/soiled bed linen was removed and clean linen provided for 1 of 4 sampled residents (Resident 18) reviewed for environment. This failure placed the resident at risk of feeling unclean, undignified, and for potential infections. Findings included . Resident 18 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (an assessment tool), dated 11/08/2023, showed Resident 18 was moderately cognitively impaired. On 01/22/2024 at 12:56 PM, Resident 18's hospital gown, bed linen sheet, and blanket was observed covered in multiple clustered yellow-orange stains, ranging from pea size to quarter size. Resident 18 said staff change the bed linens about once a week. On 01/24/2024 at 3:02 PM Resident 18's hospital gown, bed linen sheet, and blanket was observed covered in multiple clustered yellow-orange stains, ranging from pea size to quarter size. On 01/25/2024 at 11:38 AM, Staff C, Resident Care Manager, said residents bed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-26 · 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 written notice of transfer/discharge which identified the reason for transfer, the transfer date, location transferred to or a statement of the resident's appeal rights for 1 of 2 residents (Resident 41) reviewed for hospitalization. This failure placed residents at risk for being inappropriately discharged and/or not understanding their rights regarding the discharge process. Findings included . Resident 41's 12/04/2023 discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool) showed the resident had an unplanned transfer to an acute care hospital on [DATE], with return anticipated. Review of Resident 41's electronic health record (EHR) showed no documentation the facility provided the resident or resident representative written notice detailing the reasons for transfer. On 01/26/2024 at 1:51 PM, when asked if there was documentation to support Resident 41 or their representative were provided a written notice of transfer/discharge as 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 · D2024-01-26 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide the resident/resident representative at the time of transfer or within 24 hours of transfer, a written notice that specified the bed hold policy for 1 of 2 residents (Resident 41) reviewed for hospitalization. This failure placed the resident at risk of being unaware of the right to hold their bed while in the hospital. Findings included . Review of the facility's Bed Hold policy, revised 11/2016, showed the facility would inform the resident or resident representative in writing of their right to exercise a bed hold. The written bed hold notice would be provided upon admission and at or before transfer to the hospital and a copy of the notification would become a part of the resident's health record. Resident 41's 12/04/2023 discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool) showed the resident had an unplanned transfer to an acute care hospital on [DATE], with return anticipated. Review of Resident 41's electronic health record (EHR)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-26 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident dental assessment was correct and accurately reflected resident care needs for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 55) reviewed for dental care. This failure placed residents at risk for unidentified and unmet care needs and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Resident 55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS, as assessment tool), dated 11/21/2023, showed Resident 55 was moderately cognitively impaired, required assistance for personal care, and had no obvious cavities or or broken natural teeth. On 01/22/2024 at 9:57 AM, Resident 55 stated, I have plenty of problems, not able to go to the dentist, unsure if there is a dentist that comes to the facility. Resident 55 pointed to his right upper teeth showing a dark and broken tooth, and stated, This has been here for long time. On 01/26/2024 at 2:42 PM, Staff B, Director of Nursing Services, said the expectation is 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 · Dcited before2024-01-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY . Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure an environment free of accident hazards for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident 29) reviewed for accidents. The facility's failure to identify and enclose free hanging electrical wires, placed residents at risk for avoidable falls, other injuries, and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Resident 29 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool), dated 11/07/2023, showed Resident 29 was cognitively intact. On 01/22/2024 at 1:44 PM, Resident 29 said she was concerned about the two electrical cords hanging down from the back of TV to the electrical sockets. Resident 29 said she and her roommate have repeatedly hooked the arms of their wheelchair and or walker on the cords as they had passed by the electrical cords. Resident 29 said she had asked the facility twice to place the cords in an encasement to prevent equipment from getting hooked. The electrical cords were observed to be…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-26 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were labeled and/or dated when opened, in accordance with accepted professional standards of practice for 2 of 2 carts (400 & 500 Hall medication carts) and 2 of 2 medication rooms (300 & 500 Hall medication rooms) reviewed. These failures placed residents at risk to receive expired medications and negative health outcomes. Findings included . <300 Hall Medication Room> Observation of the 300 Hall medication room on 01/24/2024 at 7:27 AM, with Staff B, Director of Nursing (DON), revealed the following: 1) A multiuse vial of Tubersol (used for Tuberculosis testing) purified protein derivative (PPD), opened and undated. Per the Tubersol package insert, an opened vial should be discarded 30 days after opening. 2) A bottle of liquid lorazepam for Resident 8 was opened and undated. Review of the medication box showed instruction to discard the bottle of lorazepam 90 days after opening. 3) A bottle of liquid lorazepam for Resident 4 was opened and undated. Review of the medication box showed…
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 | 3 of 5 | 3.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.8 | +0.2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| DENOR, JOSEPH | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/05/2023 |
| SMITH, JOEL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/01/2015 |
| FARNSWORTH, STEPHEN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 09/09/2024 |
| BURNAM, SOON | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 12/01/2014 |
| KEETCH, CHAD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 03/01/2011 |
| ACTRIV HEALTHCARE LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 07/01/2015 |
| CMG CIT ACQUISITION, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 07/01/2015 |
| FAVORITE HEALTHCARE STAFFING LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 07/01/2015 |
| INTEGRATED MEDICAL SYSTEMS LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 07/01/2015 |
| PORT, BARRY | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/09/2025 |
| ENSIGN SERVICES INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2022 |
| LILLY ROAD HEALTH HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2022 |
| STANDARD BEARER HEALTHCARE OP LP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2022 |
| THE ENSIGN GROUP INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2022 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 18 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.
8 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 $1.2M 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 505243. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-24, 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.