South Hill Rehabilitation and Care Center
17 East 8th Avenue, Spokane, WA 99202 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 113 certified beds · (509) 474-5678 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — 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 (F0565)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (30) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- nursing-staff turnover (64%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 21% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 15.0% | 14.2% | 15.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.3% | 5.5% | 5.4% | typical |
| 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 | 0.5% | 1.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 19.7% | 17.7% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.9% | 2.6% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 24.7% | 17.2% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 16.7% | 12.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 93.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.2% | 4.3% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 31.3% | 22.5% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 8.2% | 15.1% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.4% | 1.3% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.1% | 82.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 13.2% | 19.9% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 13.1% | 13.4% | 12.0% | 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.
51.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 390 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 46.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 163 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 0.72 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 92% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
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 | 51.4%CMS range 47.2–56.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 8.6%CMS range 6.3–11.0 | 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 | 46.0% | 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 | 34.4% | 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 | 39.9% | 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 | 98.2% | 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 | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 3.1% | 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 | 6.3%CMS range 4.0–9.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.88 | 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 84.1 residents a day — about 74% occupied, or roughly 29 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 4.63 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.99 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.54 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 3.66 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.02 on weekdays — 27% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.17 to 0.56 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 64% is well above 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 unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.
30 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-05 · 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 interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to provide regular bathing for 3 of 6 sampled residents (Resident 2, 3,and 4). This failure placed residents for potential risk of infection, skin irritation, unpleasant body order, low self-esteem, and decreased quality of life.Finding included .<Resident 2>Review of annual assessment dated [DATE], documented Resident 2 admitted to the facility on [DATE], was cognitively intact, able to direct their own care, had diagnoses including morbid obesity (a serious health condition characterized by excessive body weight that significantly impacts daily functions such as breathing and mobility), diabetes, and chronic pressure ulcer, and required extensive assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) such as bathing and toileting.Review of care plan dated 11/04/2024, documented Resident 2 had bathing schedule twice of a week. In an interview with Resident 2 on 11/03/2025 at 2:46pm, Resident 2 stated they had missed many showers over the past few months…
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 before2025-12-05 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure accepted standards of clinical practice were met for care of a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) line (a long thin tube inserted through a vein in the arm and passed through to the larger veins near the heart) for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident 1). This failure placed residents at risk for potential delay in the administration of necessary intravenous (IV), administered through a vein, medications, and a decreased quality of life.Findings included .Review of the nurse practice act for Washington State Dated 2024, documented that a registered nurse (RN) working under the direction of a physician may perform patient treatments, whether or not the severing or penetrating of tissues is involved and whether or not a degree of independent judgment and skill is required.Review of the admission assessment dated [DATE], documented Resident 1 was admitted on [DATE], had diagnoses including pyogenic arthritis (a serious joint infection caused…
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 · E2025-06-18 · tag F0655 — patternCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the development of adequate baseline care plans within the required timeframe to ensure continuity of care for 4 of 7 sampled residents (Resident 183, 180, 52 and 17) recently admitted to the facility. This failure placed the residents at risk for unmet needs and possible complications. Findings included . <Resident 183> Review of the medical record showed Resident 183 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included a recent stroke that affected the right side of their body, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and heart failure [where the heart can't pump enough blood to meet the body's needs]. An observation on 06/09/2025 at 10:04 AM showed Resident 183 in their room sitting in a wheelchair (WC) with their representative present. The resident's right arm was elevated with a stack of towels about 4 inches thick. On their wardrobe door was signage that instructed the staff to keep their arm elevated 30 degrees…
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 before2025-06-18 · 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
<Second Floor Dining Room> Observations of the meal showed the following on 06/09/2025: At 12:01 PM, Staff D, Speech Therapist, touched the back of a female resident seated at a dining room (DR) table. Staff D completed HH then grabbed a pair of gloves and put them on. Staff D approached another female resident, touched their wheelchair (WC) with the gloved hand, walked to the serving area to get a bowl of soup, and brought it to the female resident. Staff D then touched another resident's WC with the same gloves on, went to get ketchup at the serving area. Staff D returned to the resident with the same gloved hands, opened the burger bun, poured the ketchup on the burger, and moved it closer to the resident. At 12:05 PM, Staff D went to get a plate of food with the same gloved hands and brought it to Resident 183, touched the table surface, then the resident's right chest, and then the table surface again with gloved hands. A staff approached Staff D with a plate, Staff D touched the plate of food and gave instructions to the staff. Staff D then assisted a male resident in their WC…
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 before2025-06-18 · 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 ensure signage was placed to inform the staff of residents (Resident 7, 77, 180, 182, 183, and 191) who required Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP, infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms [MDRO, germs that are resistant to many antibiotics]). Additionally, the facility failed to ensure hand hygiene was implemented as required during medication administration. These failures placed the residents at risk for the spread of infections, illnesses and unintended health consequences. Findings included . According to a 06/28/2024 Centers for Disease Control article, EBP are used in conjunction with standard precautions and expanded the use of putting on gown and gloves during high-contact resident care activities (e.g., dressing, bathing/showering, transferring, changing linens, providing hygiene, wound care and assisting with toileting) for residents known to be colonized or infected with a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-18 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure informed consents which explained the potential risks and benefits associated with the use of psychotropic medications and/or vaccines were accurately completed, and obtained from the resident or their representative prior to their administration, for 2 of 5 sampled residents (Residents 14 and 3) reviewed for unnecessary medications. In addition, the facility failed to ensure Resident 3 had the cognitive ability to understand the risks prior to signing the informed consent. These failures placed the residents and/or their representatives at risk of not being fully informed of the potential risks and benefits of receiving the medication and/or vaccines. Findings included . <Resident 14> The 04/15/2025 quarterly assessment documented Resident 14 had diagnoses which included depression, a mental health condition characterized by a persistent feeling of sadness that lasted over an extended period. In addition, the assessment documented that the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-18 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — isolatedHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to utilize their grievance process to ensure concerns and grievances expressed by members of the Resident Council were responded to and/or followed up in a timely manner for 2 of 7 sampled residents (Residents 35 and 59) reviewed for Resident Council. This failure placed the residents at risk for a diminished quality of life and loss of self-worth. Findings included . The facility Grievance policy, last reviewed 12/20/2023, documented the grievance process was available to be utilized by residents to express concerns with their care and treatment as well as other general concerns. The policy documented the facility's Grievance Official would evaluate, investigate, and take actions to resolve the concerns. In addition, the policy documented the Grievance Official would respond to the individual who expressed the concern within three working days of the concern being expressed, complete the grievance resolution forms, and follow up with the individual to inform what steps were taken to address and/or correct the concern.…
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 before2025-06-18 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure controlled medications were adequately accounted for, following accepted standards of practice in 3 of 3 controlled medication ledgers reviewed. This failure placed residents at risk of misappropriation of controlled substances and a decreased quality of care. Findings included . According to the 2025 article titled Narcotic Drugs: Handling and Documentation, Controlled Drug Policy and Procedure, written by [NAME], a nationally recognized Registered Nurse (RN) and online educator, for the publication RN.org, the traditional method of accounting for narcotic medications in long-term care facilities included an end-of-shift narcotics count with the oncoming nurse counting the medications, the outgoing nurse verifying the count, and both nurses signing off in the ledger that the count was correct. <Controlled Substance Ledger Books> Record reviews and interviews of the controlled substance ledger books showed the following: - On 06/18/2025 at 1:35…
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 · D2025-06-18 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the medical record showed an accurate account of a resident's fluid intake while on a fluid restriction for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 180) reviewed for nutrition and hydration. This failure placed the resident at risk of dehydration, fluid overload, and rehospitalization. Findings included . Review of the medical record showed Resident 180 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] after being hospitalized for an episode of congestive heart failure [CHF, where the heart can't pump enough blood to meet the body's needs] and septic shock [a severe medical condition characterized by dangerously low blood pressure and organ failure, resulting from the body's overwhelming response to an infection] secondary to cellulitis [a bacterial infection of the skin and underlying tissues]. The medical record showed that at the hospital, almost 4.8 liters (a measurement and over a gallon) of fluid were removed. The resident received a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-18 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident 77) reviewed for tube feeding (TF, the delivery of nutrients through a tube directly inserted into the stomach) received their nutrition according to provider orders. This failure placed the resident at risk of nutritional complications, dehydration, or fluid overload. Findings included . Review of a 06/02/2025 admission assessment showed Resident 77 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included a progressive neurological condition and severe malnutrition. The staff assessed the resident as cognitively intact and depended on TF for nutrition. An observation on 06/11/2025 at 12:50 PM showed Resident 77 in bed with the head of the bed up. A dressing was observed to their left abdomen and TF tubing extending out. A pole was observed with a pump for the delivery of enteral nutrition. Resident 77 was unable to be interviewed secondary to their desire to conserve physical energy.…
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 20 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-18 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and observation, the facility failed to ensure medications carts were locked/secured in the absence of a nurse, expired medications were discarded timely, and injectable medications were dated/timed when opened. These failures placed the residents at risk of unauthorized access to medications and their potential adverse effects, theft or diversion of medications, and decreased potency and safety of the medications. Findings included . <Unsecured Medication Cart> An observation on the second floor on 06/09/2025 at 9:06 AM showed an unlocked and unattended medication cart stationed at the beginning of Unit B - Transitional Care Unit. In this continuous observation, Staff C, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) approached the medication cart. At 9:30 AM, the medication cart was again observed unlocked and unattended, and Staff C was coming from Unit B, Long Term Care Unit. Staff C acknowledged the medication cart was opened and that it should have been locked, and stated it should be secured, When we are away. <Expired Medications> On 06/18/2025 at 01:45 PM, during an…
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 · D2025-06-18 · tag F0849 — isolatedArrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to identify a designated interdisciplinary team member, to act as a liaison for coordinating care and communication with the hospice provider, for 1 of 1 sampled residents (Resident 37), reviewed for hospice services. This failure placed the resident at risk for unmet care needs. Findings included The 05/05/2025 significant change assessment documented Resident 37 was able to make decisions regarding their care, had diagnoses which included malnutrition, asthma, and respiratory failure. In addition, the assessment documented the resident received hospice services. Review of Resident 37's record showed a referral was made on 04/16/2025 for hospice services, and serv ices were started on 05/01/2025. Review of the facility's 05/01/2025 hospice agreement documented the services and responsibilities for care that would be provided by both the facility and the hospice provider; however, the policy did not include and/or document who the designated facility liaison to hospice was that was responsible for collaborating in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-02 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 2) reviewed for quality of care, received timely notification to the medical provider of a change in condition. This failure placed the resident at risk of delayed access to care, inability to participate in care planning, and diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the skilled nursing facility transfer orders dated [DATE] for Resident 2 showed they were discharged from the hospital in stable condition following an episode of respiratory failure. The oxygen therapy orders showed the resident was to receive oxygen at 2-3 liters per min (LPM; a unit of measure) via a nasal cannula (thin flexible tube with prongs that go inside the nostrils), and the resident had adamantly declined non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (respiratory support where air and oxygen is given through a mask under positive pressure). Per Resident 2's Portable Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) 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 · D2024-04-09 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to investigate resident-reported concerns (grievances) and to provide timely follow-up for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident 2), reviewed for grievances. This failure placed the resident at risk of having unresolved grievances and a diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the policy titled, Safeguarding Residents' Belongings, revised December 2023, showed the facility would promptly respond to and investigate complaints of missing property, and the Administrator or their designee would notify the resident of the results of the investigation and corrective action taken within 10 working days. In an interview on 03/29/2024 at 1:18 PM, Resident 2 stated during their admission to the facility they had reported to multiple unidentified nursing assistants and one unidentified charge nurse a concern about missing property (a notebook) and missing money (stored inside the notebook). The resident stated they were told by the charge nurse that facility administration was aware of the concern and were investigating.…
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 · D2024-04-09 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of potential misappropriation was reported to the State Agency as required, for one of five sampled residents (Resident 2) reviewed for abuse. This failure placed residents at risk for possible abuse. Findings included . In an interview on 03/29/2024 at 1:18 PM, Resident 2 stated during their admission to the facility they had reported to multiple unidentified nursing assistants and one unidentified charge nurse a complainant about missing property (a notebook) and missing money (stored inside the notebook). The resident stated they were told by the charge nurse that facility administration was aware of the concern and were investigating. Review of the January to April 2024 incident logs showed no entries for Resident 2. In an interview on 04/09/2024, Staff C, Charge Nurse, confirmed Resident 2 had mentioned missing property and money to them, and they had notified the resident that facility administration was investigating the complaint. Staff C stated they were not involved in the investigation 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 · D2024-04-09 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to care plan and implement an identified intervention for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident 3) reviewed for care planning. This failure placed the resident at risk of unmet needs and diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of a facility investigation dated 03/15/2024 showed Resident 3 made a statement about trauma from their past that was triggered by cares provided by a (male) nurse the previous night. Per the investigation, the resident's care plan was updated to include female-only care for personal care. Review of Resident 3's care plan, effective 03/11/2024 to 04/20/2024, showed no interventions for female-only care for personal care. The [NAME] (summarized version of the care plan) for the same timeframe also showed no interventions for female-only personal care. In an interview on 04/09/2024 at 12:39 PM a representative for Resident 3 stated they were told Resident 3 would have female-only staff provide personal care after…
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 · D2024-04-09 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate the cause(s) of falls and assess the need for additional effective interventions for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 1), reviewed for accident hazards. This failed practice placed the resident at risk for additional falls, injury secondary to falls, and diminished quality of life. Findings included . Review of the 03/06/2024 significant change assessment showed Resident 1 was severely cognitively impaired and had a history of falls. Additionally, the resident required moderate staff assistance for transfers, toileting, and walking, and supervision in their wheelchair. Review of Resident 1's care plan for falls, initiated 04/27/2023, showed staff were to offer toileting assistance every two hours and assess for unmet needs, ensure the resident's floor was clean and free of clutter, encourage appropriate footwear, ensure the bed was at an appropriate height to allow for safe transfers, and provide a room in a highly trafficked area to facilitate frequent observation. 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 · F2024-02-22 · tag F0801 — widespreadEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to employ sufficient staff with the appropriate licensing necessary to carry out the functions of the nutritional services for 91 residents. Failure to ensure the Registered Dietician (RD) had a license to practice in Washington State placed residents at risk for unmet nutritional needs and possible unintended weight loss or gain. Findings included . On 02/21/2024, a review of the staff credentials showed Staff K, Registered Dietician (RD), had successfully completed requirements for dietetic registration through the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Commission on Dietetic Registration, with a certificate valid through 08/31/2024. A copy of Staff K's license to practice in Washington State was also requested and none was provided. A search of the Washington State Department of Health Provider Credential database found no record to show that Staff K had the required Dietician Certification (license) to practice as a dietician in Washington State. In an interview on 02/22/2024 at 11:08 AM, Staff K was asked if they were…
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 · Fcited before2024-02-22 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure food was prepared in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure the kitchen staff with facial hair were wearing beard restraints (nets) to prevent hair from contacting exposed food and clean equipment. Unsafe food handling practices placed the residents at risk of unsanitary food and possible foodborne illness. Findings included . A document from the United States Food & Drug Administration Food Code website titled Food and Drug Administration Food Code 2022, Chapter 2. Management and Personnel Section 2-402 Hair Restraints updated on January 18, 2023, showed that food employees shall wear coverings over their hair and beards to prevent hair from contacting exposed food and clean equipment. On 02/13/2024 at 8:49 AM, during a tour of the kitchen, Staff J, Cook, was observed chopping fresh fruit. Staff J had a full beard of short hair, without a beard net in place. On 02/22/2024 at 10:24 AM, during a second visit to the kitchen, Staff L,…
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 · D2024-02-22 · 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
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide a dignified dining service for 1 of 1 sampled resident (341). Specifically, Resident 341 was referred to as a feeder on their printed meal ticket. This failure placed the resident at risk for psychosocial harm and decreased quality of life. Findings included . On 02/21/2024 at 12:02 PM, Resident 341 was served lunch in the 2nd floor dining room. A meal ticket listed the Resident name, diet, and assistance level as 1:1 Feeder. The meal ticket was placed face-up on the table in front of the resident, and visible to residents, staff and visitors. On 02/21/2024 between 12:15 PM and 12:37 PM, Resident 341 ate their meal without staff assistance, and at 12:57 PM, had finished eating and left the dining room independently in their wheelchair. During an interview on 02/22/2024 at 10:31 AM, Staff Q, Nursing Assistant, stated they knew what level of assistance a resident needed at meals by reading the meal ticket. Staff Q stated if they needed to communicate the level of assistance a resident needed with eating or drinking,…
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 · D2024-02-22 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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 thoroughly investigate an allegation of abuse involving a bruise of unknown origin for 1 of 3 sampled residents (68) reviewed for skin conditions. This failure placed residents at risk for potential mistreatment and decreased quality of life. Findings included . According to the 02/12/2024 quarterly assessment, Resident 68 had diagnoses including schizoaffective disorder and had a history of falling. Resident 68 was severely cognitively impaired and required substantial staff assistance for their activities of daily living (ADLs). A review of the Accidents and Incidents log documented that on 02/06/2024, Resident 68 had a bruise of unknown origin on their right leg, the investigation was still pending, and this was reported to the State Reporting Agency. The undated Incident Investigation documented Resident 68 had bruising to the right interior upper leg found by Staff E, Nursing Assistant (NAC), during cares. Staff E notified the licensed nurse. Staff E gave a statement that they noticed a large bruise on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-22 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide dependent residents services to maintain their personal hygiene for 1 of 2 sampled residents, (341), reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs) for dependent residents. Specifically, the facility failed to provided nail care. This failure had the potential to place the resdient at risk for unmet care needs and diminished quality of life. Findings included . A review of the record showed Resident 341 had a diagnosis of arthritis (inflammation of the joints that caused pain and stiffness) and needed assistance with personal care. A 02/07/2024 quarterly assessment showed the resident had frequent pain that limited day-to-day activities and required extensive assistance with most ADLs, including hygiene and bathing. The 02/07/2024 ADL care plan instructed nursing staff to perform nail care twice a week on the residents shower days. A review of Resident 341's record from admission on [DATE] to 02/22/2024 showed no documentation 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 · D2024-02-22 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure blood pressure medications were consistently monitored for 2 of 5 sample resident (9, 53) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This failure placed the residents at risk for potential adverse side effects and medical conditions. Findings included . <Resident 53> Per the quarterly 02/12/2024 assessment, Resident 53 had diagnoses which included high blood pressure. Review of the Active Order Report showed the physician prescribed a blood pressure medication (Cardizem) on 07/20/2023 to be given every 12 hours. The order instructed nursing staff to hold the medication if the heart rate was less than 55 beats per minute or the systolic blood pressure was under 105. Review of the January and February 2024 MARs showed on 01/06/2024, 01/10/2024, 01/11/2024, 01/20/2024, 01/21/2024, 01/24/2024, 02/02/2024, 02/03/2024, 02/07/2024, and 02/08/2024, the PM dose of Cardizem was administered, but the blood pressure values were documented as zero's, and no actual blood pressure values were documented to show the blood pressure 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-22 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that 1 of 5 residents (32), reviewed for unnecessary medications, was free of significant medication errors. Specifically, Resident 32 had numerous medications that were not given as ordered, when they were at dialysis three times a week. This failed practice put the resident at increased risk of medical complications due to missed doses of important medications. Findings included . An agreement between the facility and the resident's dialysis center, dated 04/13/2021, showed that the facility was responsible for providing the dialysis center information about the resident's medications. According to a comprehensive assessment dated [DATE], Resident 32 was cognitively intact and made their needs known. The assessment further showed that Resident 32 had diagnoses which included end-stage renal disease (ESRD) that required dialysis three times a week (a treatment to filter wastes and water from the blood when the kidneys no longer work). A review…
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 · D2024-02-22 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolatedEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure food preferences were honored for 2 of 9 residents (Residents 9 and 48) reviewed for food. Specifically, the facility failed to thoroughly assess Resident 9's nutritional preferences for a Kosher diet, foods that are processed and prepared according to Jewish religion, and failed to ensure Resident 48 was provided foods they selected on their menus that they felt would assist them to lose weight. These failures placed the residents at risk for decreased quality of life. Findings included . <Resident 9> Per the 01/15/2024 quarterly assessment, Resident 9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], was able to make decisions regarding their care, and was independent for eating. During the lunch observation on 02/13/2024 at 12:24 PM, Staff AA, Nursing Assistant requested a serving of the beef stew from Staff Z, dietary aide, for Resident 9. When Staff Z stated the resident doesn't normally eat meat, Staff AA stated it was all right, 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 · D2024-02-22 · tag F0810 — isolatedProvide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
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 assistive eating equipment/utensil devices were provided for 2 of 9 sampled residents (14, 20) observed during dining. This failure placed residents at risk of decreased oral intake, weight loss, and nutritional complications. Findings included . Resident 14 Per the 01/13/2024 quarterly assessment, Resident 14 had diagnoses which included Parkinson's disease, a nervous system disorder that caused tremors, muscle rigidity, decreased mobility and slow voluntary movements. In addition, the assessment showed the resident was able to eat independently with only set-up assistance from staff. Review of the 01/03/2024 nutritional care plan instructed staff to provide assistance with eating as needed. In addition, the staff were informed the resident was to have a lipped plate, a plate that has a high wall with an inner lip that kept food from sliding off the plate and was used to push food onto the eating utensil, at meals. On 02/13/2024 at 12:21 PM, Resident 14 was observed eating lunch. The resident's lunch…
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 before2024-02-22 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure appropriate hand hygiene and glove changes were performed during wound care for 1 of 1 sampled residents (69) observed during a dressing change. This failure placed the resident at risk for infection and delayed wound healing. Findings included . The CDC recommended healthcare personnel should use alcohol-based hand rub or wash with soap and water .immediately before touching a patient, after touching a patient or the patient's immediate environment and immediately after glove removal. When washing hands with soap and water .rub hands together for at least 15 seconds. When using handrubs rub hands together covering all surfaces until dry. According to the 02/05/2024 quarterly assessment Resident 69 had diagnoses of Stage 4 sacral pressure ulcer (an injury of the tailbone area caused by prolonged pressure on the skin which extends into the muscle, tendon, ligament, cartilage or even bone), Osteomyelitis (an infection of the bone), and Paraplegia (a type of paralysis that affects the ability to move the lower half 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 · E2022-01-13 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — patternHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
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, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure 4 of 5 sample residents (33, 57, 365, 366), reviewed for advance directives, were provided with written information regarding advance directives, and the right to formulate one, to ensure the residents' desired level of medical care was known in the case of an inability to direct care on their own. Findings included: RESIDENT 33 Review of Resident 33's facility's printed Record of Admission showed a facility admission date of [DATE] with medical diagnoses that included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD - a lung disease characterized by persistent repiratory symptoms like progressive breathlessness and cough), major depressive disorder, asthma, high blood pressure, diabetes, and coagulation disorder (a disruption in the body's ability to control blood clotting). Review of Resident 33's electronic medical record showed a Physician's Order for Life Sustaining Treatment (POLST) form regarding cardiopulmonary…
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 before2022-01-13 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure food was distributed and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Observations revealed the facility failed to ensure 31 slices of pie were covered on rolling carts to be delivered to residents. Findings included: During an observation of the second-floor dining on 01/10/2022 at 12:10 PM, pies were observed to be on separate saucers and were uncovered. The pies were then put onto the meal tray and loaded into the cart. Pies remained uncovered on the meal tray. During observation of first-floor dining on 01/10/2022 at 12:18 PM, pies were observed uncovered and on small individual paper plates. The pies were then put onto residents' meal trays and put into the rolling tray cart. The pies remained uncovered on the meal tray. During observation of the second-floor tray pass on 01/10/2022 at 12:25 PM, Staff C, Nursing Assistant, was observed serving a meal tray with the pie uncovered. During…
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 · D2022-01-13 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor 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 interview, record review, and review of the facility's admission Packet, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 3 sample residents reviewed for choices (14), had choices and preferences honored regarding bathing/showers. Findings included: Review of the electronic medical record revealed Resident 14 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] from a hospital with diagnoses including coronary artery disease, depression, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD - a lung disease characterized by persistent repiratory symptoms like progressive breathlessness and cough). Review of Resident 14's 10/20/2021 care plan showed that the resident was to have showers on Wednesdays and Sundays, and bed baths as needed. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set - a document required to thoroughly evaluate residents, dated 10/26/2021 showed a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 out of 15, which indicated intact cognition. Under the daily preferences section of the document, it showed that it was very…
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 | 5 of 5 | 3.2 | +1.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.4 | +0.6 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| HEFFERNAN, JASON | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/01/2025 |
| FARNSWORTH, STEPHEN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER | since 09/11/2024 |
| BURNAM, SOON | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 09/11/2024 |
| ROSS, STEVE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 09/11/2024 |
| SATO, AMI | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 09/11/2024 |
| RACKHAM, MICHAEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/20/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 9 rows in the source record cover these 6 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.
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 $4.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 21% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in WA
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 505414. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-18, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.