Home / Washington / University Place
5520 Bridgeport Way West, University Place, WA 98467 · Pierce County · (253) 566-7166
120 certified beds, about 108 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1992
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 505473 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 9, 2026, inspectors cited 13 health deficiencies (the Washington average is 15.8, the national average 9.2).
Of 39 health citations since November 2023, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $16,350 in the last three years; the largest was $16,350, and the latest is dated June 9, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 4.19 hours per resident per day, against 4.36 across Washington and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.54 of those hours.
42.3% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Washington average 45.1%).
CMS links it to Vertical Health Services, an affiliated group of 15 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 39 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to timely assess, investigate and implement interventions for significant weight loss for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 112) reviewed for nutrition services. Resident 112, a resident identified as at risk for weight loss, experienced harm when they had a significant weight loss of 20 percent total body weight in a month, mild-moderate wasting as observed in temples and orbitals and appeared thin. This failure placed them at risk for functional decline, impaired wound healing, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure care plans were accurate to include all needed care and/or remove discontinued/resolved health issues for 5 of 22 sampled residents (Residents 7, 5, 27, 4, and 98) reviewed for accuracy of care plans. This failure placed residents at risk of lack of care, unmet needs, inaccurate medical records, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure bathroom call light pull cords were accessible to residents from the floor on 2 of 4 sampled halls (100 and 300) reviewed for call light systems. This failure placed residents at risk for inability to summon help in the event of an emergency, increased risk of injury and unmet or delayed care needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to initiate a grievance for resident care concerns voiced at the resident council meeting for 1 of 4 resident council meetings minutes (May 2026) when reviewed. This failure placed residents at risk for unmet care needs, poor hygiene and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain a clean, sanitary and well-maintained resident environment for 2 of 22 sampled residents (Residents 112 and 67) reviewed for homelike environment. These failures placed residents at risk for reduced comfort, unsanitary conditions and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to initiate a grievance after a resident concern regarding staff customer service for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 138) reviewed for abuse/grievances. This failure placed residents at risk of unmet needs, higher likelihood of neglect, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the use of antipsychotic medications (medications affecting the mind) was appropriate by providing adequate monitoring or appropriate indications for its use for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident 50) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This failure placed the resident at risk for adverse side effects and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure incidents of potential abuse and/or neglect were identified and reported to the Administrator and/or the State Survey Agency for 2 of 7 sampled residents (Residents 27 and 7) reviewed for abuse and/or dignity. Failure to report allegations of abuse/neglect or verbal abuse placed residents at risk for additional abuse and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the minimum data set (MDS, a required assessment tool) accurately reflected the status of 2 of 22 sampled residents (Residents 112 and 21) reviewed for accuracy of assessments. This failure placed the residents at risk for inappropriate care planning, unmet care needs, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 of 8 sampled residents (Resident 81) reviewed for bowel management and anticoagulant therapy. These failures placed the residents at risk for poor clinical outcomes, decreased comfort, and poor quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents with limited range of motion received the necessary services to maintain their level of functioning for 2 of 4 sampled residents (Residents 24 and 112) reviewed for limited range of motion (ROM). This failure placed residents at risk for further decline in range of motion, increased dependence, pain and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide an environment that was free from accident hazards for 2 of 5 sampled residents (Residents 27 and 50) reviewed for accidents. Failure to provide a properly fitting wheelchair for Resident 27 and failure to implement interventions after a fall for Resident 50 placed the residents at risk for accidents or injuries and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than five percent. A total of nine errors were made in thirty-one opportunities during a medication administration for 1 of 6 sampled residents (Resident 96) reviewed for medication administration. This placed the residents at risk for receiving medications that were not effective or less effective and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement their abuse prohibition policy for 2 of 2 residents (Residents 2 & 3) reviewed for abuse and/or neglect. The facility failed to completely and thoroughly investigate Resident 2's unexpected death and failed to conduct through investigations to identify the root cause(s) and contributing factors related to Resident 2 & 3's falls. Failure to conduct a thorough investigation placed residents at risk for further injuries, potential abuse/neglect, and other negative health outcomes.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure respiratory care and services were provided in accordance with Physician's orders and accepted professional standards of practice for 4 of 5 residents (Resident 2, 7, 8 & 9) reviewed for respiratory services. This failure placed the residents at risk for respiratory complications, unmet needs and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure medically-related social services were provided for 1 of 4 residents (Resident 2) reviewed for respiratory services. The failure to involve facility social workers for residents demonstrating behaviors of rejection of care placed residents at risk for unmet health needs and other negative health outcomes.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow up on concerns of the resident council related to resident care for 3 of 4 resident council meetings minutes (November and December 2024, and January 2025) when reviewed. This failure placed residents at risk for unmet care needs and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a provider's order for blood pressure parameters were consistently followed for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident 81) and initiated non-pharmacological interventions (NPI) prior to the administration of as needed (PRN) pain medication for 3 of 5 sampled residents (Residents 100, 79, and 18) when reviewed for unnecessary medications. These failures placed residents at risk for receiving unnecessary medications, a diminished quality of life, and unmet needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food items were dated and meals/beverages were served at the appropriate temperatures when reviewed for kitchen services. These failures placed residents at risk for foodborne illnesses and diminished quality life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to have psychotropic medication (medications that affect a person's mental state) informed consent accurately completed prior to administering the medication for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident 100) when reviewed for unnecessary medication use. This failure placed the resident and/or their legal representative at risk for lack of knowledge to make an informed decision regarding the use of the medication, inaccurate data in the medical record, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to obtain an advanced directive (AD, a legal document that establishes a representative to make medical decisions when you are unable to) and/or perform periodic reviews of AD for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 16) when reviewed for AD. This failure placed the resident at risk of not having an established decision-maker, lack of ability to direct care, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to identify and report an allegation of abuse for 2 of 2 sampled residents (Residents 82 and 169) when reviewed for abuse. This failure placed the residents at risk of further abuse, psychological distress, and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an incident to rule out abuse for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident 82) when reviewed for abuse. This failure to conduct and document a thorough investigation and clearly identify the root cause and contributing factors, and follow-through with new interventions, placed the residents at risk for further abuse, psychological distress and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteResident 100 Review of the EHR showed Resident 100 readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of depression, diabetes (too much sugar in the blood), and bipolar disorder (episodes of mood swings ranging from depressive lows to manic highs). Resident 100 was able to make needs known. Review of a care plan initiated 12/03/2024 showed Resident 100 was at risk for falls and had five falls in the month of February 2025. Interventions included a CALL DON'T FALL sign placed in line of sight to remind Resident 100 to use the call light for any transfers, toileting, or any other assistance and - Bed in lowest position when unattended. Observations on 04/07/2025 at 2:30 PM, 04/08/2025 at 1:31 PM and 04/09/2025 at 10:04 AM showed no CALL DON'T FALL sign posted in Resident 100's room. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the use of an indwelling urinary catheter (a tube which drains urine from the bladder into a collection bag) was properly monitored to ensure it was functioning for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident 26) reviewed for urinary catheters. This failure placed the resident at risk for further complications, prolonged therapy, and unmet care needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure respiratory services were provided according to professional standards of practice for 1of 2 sampled residents (Resident 26) when reviewed for respiratory care. Failure to ensure oxygen delivery was provided according to the provider's order placed the resident at risk for discomfort, a potential negative outcome, and unmet needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide dental services for 1 of 4 sampled residents (Resident 56) when reviewed for dental services. This failure placed the resident at risk for dental problems, nutritional compromise, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteResident 82 Review of the EHR showed Resident 82 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include fracture of right humerus (long bone of upper arm), type two diabetes (high blood sugar), insomnia (inability to sleep), and chronic pain syndrome. Resident 82 was able to communicate needs. During an interview on 04/07/2025 at 10:33 AM, Resident 82 stated they did not have an upper denture, and their lower denture did not fit them. Resident 82 stated they had not seen the dentist and were not aware of plans to see them. Review of a dental consult dated 01/23/2025 showed Resident 82 was not in the room and the resident was not seen. A second dental consult dated 04/08/2025 showed Resident 82 was in the shower and the resident was not seen. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to serve food at proper temperatures and palatable taste when reviewed for kitchen services. These failures placed residents at risk for decreased nutritional intake, foodborne illness, and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to post the actual hours worked for the nursing staffing hours daily for 5 of 5 days during the survey period (04/07/2025 - 04/11/2025) when reviewed for nurse staff posting. This failure prevented the residents, family members, and visitors from exercising their rights to know the actual numbers of available nursing staff in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to accurately assess 2 of 22 sampled residents (Residents 2 and 68) when reviewed for comprehensive assessment. This failure placed residents at risk of unidentified care needs, lack of care planning, lack of needed services, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain resident refrigerators in sanitary conditions for 1 of 1 resident refrigerator when reviewed for kitchen. This failure placed residents at risk of consuming contaminated foods, foodborne illness, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide and accurately complete in writing the required forms of their potential liability for payment, related to Medicare services ending, for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 14) reviewed for coverage notification. Failure to ensure Resident 14 was provided the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) and Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) Advanced Beneficiary Notice (ABN: a notification that provides an estimated cost of continuing services which may no longer be covered by Medicare. Beneficiaries may choose to continue the services but may be financially liable), diminished their ability to make informed financial and care decisions related to their continued stay.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) assessment was accurately completed upon or prior to admission for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident 76) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This failure placed the resident at risk for inappropriate placement and/or not receiving timely and necessary services to meet one's mental health care needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure services provided met professional standards of practice for 2 of 25 sampled residents (Residents 214 and 39) reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to ensure Resident 214's peripherally inserted midline catheter (PICC, a long flexible catheter [tube] placed into a vein in the upper arm and into a large vein) and Resident 39's provider order for a referral to urology (a provider that specialized in diagnosing and treating diseases of the urinary organs) was obtained. These failures placed residents at risk of medical complications, unmet needs, and a poor quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to ensure transfer pole and bed mobility bar (safety devices used for residents to assist in transfers and/or positioning) provider orders were obtained, assessments were completed, and care plan was updated for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 11) reviewed for accident hazards. This failure placed residents at risk of improper transfer pole and bed mobility bar use, decreased freedom of movement, and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure enteral nutrition (the delivery of nutrients through a feeding tube directly into the stomach or small intestine) was administered in accordance with provider's orders and professional standards of practice for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident 15) reviewed for enteral nutrition. The facility failed to have a system in place which ensured the amount of enteral formula (liquid food products) a resident received was reconciled with the amount they were ordered to receive. This failure placed the residents at risk for inadequate nutrition, dehydration, and other adverse outcomes.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide timely dental assistance to residents for 2 of 3 sampled residents (Residents 2 and 53) when reviewed for dental services. This failure placed residents at risk of dental pain, difficulty eating, avoidable weight loss, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 4 of 5 residents (Residents 1,2,3 and 4) reviewed for Covid-19 vaccinations had received Covid-19 Vaccines after consent was obtained. This failure placed residents at risk for adverse health effects of a communicable disease, unmet needs and a decreased quality of life.
21 fire safety citations on file: 8 on June 9, 2026, 5 on April 11, 2025, 8 on May 9, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| June 9, 2026 | Fine | $16,350 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Washington | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 4.19 | 4.36 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.54 | 0.94 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.50 | 3.80 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.57 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.08 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 42.3% | 45.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 23.1% | 45.4% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.07 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 4.47 on weekdays and 3.50 on weekends, 22% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 4.02 in April to June 2025 to 4.19 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 4.19 | 0.54 | 4.47 | 3.50 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 108 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.94 | 0.55 | 4.18 | 3.33 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 108 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.83 | 0.50 | 4.08 | 3.19 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 111 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.02 | 0.53 | 4.27 | 3.39 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 113 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Washington, Jan to Mar 2026 | 4.21 | 0.90 | 4.44 | 3.66 | 3.7% | 0.1% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Washington, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $23.65 | $22.59 to $27.85 | 30,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $39.98 | $36.98 to $45.18 | 6,780 |
| Registered nurses | $59.71 | $49.57 to $64.54 | 69,260 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Washington | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 11.9 | 14.2 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.4 | 1.0 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.6 | 1.6 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.2 | 2.6 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.9 | 1.3 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 17.7 | 17.2 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.3 | 4.3 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 14.7 | 15.1 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 22.7 | 19.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 13.5 | 13.4 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.6 | 1.3 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.1 | 1.5 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Agility Health and Rehabilitation's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (43.3% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
43.3% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Washington: 71 better, 16 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 186 eligible stays.
9.5% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Washington: 7 better, 0 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 181 eligible stays.
6.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Washington: 4 better, 0 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 114 eligible stays.
66.0% this home
Median of homes: Washington61.4% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 100 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Washington0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 131 residents counted.
1.8% this home
Median of homes: Washington1.4% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 131 residents counted.
100.0% this home
Median of homes: Washington98.3% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 67 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: BRIDGEPORT WAY W HEALTHCARE LLC. CMS links this home to Vertical Health Services, a group of 15 nursing homes averaging 1.9 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vhs Wa Opco Holdings LLC | Direct ownership interest | Organization | 06/01/2023 | |
| Miller, William | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 06/01/2023 | |
| Bridgeport Way W Consulting LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 09/01/2023 | |
| Denor, Joseph | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/01/2025 | |
| Miller, William | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/01/2023 | |
| Shurman, Larry | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/01/2023 | |
| Bridgeport Way W Consulting LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/08/2025 | |
| Denor, Joseph | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/08/2025 | |
| Shurman, Larry | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/08/2025 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Washington. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.