Home / Washington / Bellingham
2400 Samish Way, Bellingham, WA 98229 · Whatcom County · (360) 734-4800
44 certified beds, about 37 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1972
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 505140 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on August 7, 2025, inspectors cited 8 health deficiencies (the Washington average is 15.8, the national average 9.2).
Of 37 health citations since July 2023, 4 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 3 fines totaling $63,884 in the last three years; the largest was $41,291, and the latest is dated February 13, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.93 hours per resident per day, against 4.36 across Washington and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 1.22 of those hours.
62.5% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Washington average 45.1%).
CMS links it to Cascadia Healthcare, an affiliated group of 47 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 37 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the nursing staff used professional standards of care and aseptic (to prevent healthcare associated infections, surgical site infections and laboratory contamination) technique when changing Resident 20's PICC line [a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) is a long, soft, flexible tube inserted into a vein in the upper arm and advanced to a large vein above the heart] dressing. Resident 20 experienced harm when they required an emergency transfer to the emergency department (ED) to have their PICC line replaced, and additional diagnostic procedures (ultrasound and Xray) performed when their PICC line was cut with unclean and unsterile scissors. Additionally, this failed practice placed the resident at serious risk for central line associated blood stream infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were provided all physician ordered medications on 13 of 14 days reviewed for 20 residents. This failed practice disrupted the residents' continuity of care and placed residents at risk of not having their medical needs met.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to conduct a complete and thorough investigation of mistreatment for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 20) who was sent to the emergency department due to a Registered Nurse (RN) accidentally cutting a residents peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) line during a PICC line dressing change. This failed practice prevented the facility from identifying why the incident occurred, identifying the nursing staff's competency improvement needs which placed residents at risk.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the daily nurse staffing posting was completed daily with the total number of actual nursing hours worked along with the resident census from 01/07/2026 to 02/13/2026 for a total of 37 days. This failed practice prevented the residents and visitors' ability to readily view the nurse staffing information.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure 1 of 3 residents (Resident 1) who were at risk of pressure injuries (PI), did not develop an avoidable PI. The facility failed to implement preventive PI interventions for Resident 1. This failed practice resulted in the development of a deep tissue injury (DTI) of Resident 1's left heel which caused the resident significant discomfort. This failed practice placed other residents at risk of pressure injuries, pain and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment on 2 of 2 units and the main dining room. Failure to ensure a comfortable interior in the dining room, unit halls free of unpleasant odors, adequate supply of linens, and perform needed repairs in resident's rooms placed residents at risk for decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper storage and labeling of insulin (injectable medication that regulates blood sugar) in 2 of 2 medication carts (North and South carts) when reviewed for medication storage. This failure placed residents at risk of receiving expired medications, ineffective treatment, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop, implement and maintain a process to ensure annual performance reviews were completed for 3 of 5 staff (Staff P, Q, R) and that Nursing Assistant Certified (NAC) staff had the required 12 hour annual in-service training for 4 of 5 staff (Staff O, P, Q, R) reviewed for competent nursing staff. The failure to ensure NAC's had annual performance reviews to assess areas of weakness so the facility could provide in-service training and/or NACs received 12 hours annual in-service training placed residents at risk of less than competent care and services from staff.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to initiate, investigate, and resolve a grievance for 1 of 1 sampled residents (Resident 3) reviewed for grievances. This failure placed residents at risk for emotional distress and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure professional standards were met for 3 of 5 residents (Residents 3, 6, and 26) reviewed for unnecessary medication review. The facility failed to recognize and ensure parameters were met for blood pressure medication administration and diabetes (blood sugar levels in blood are unmanaged) medication management for the residents. The facility failed to notify the medical provider when the resident's blood sugar levels and blood pressures were beyond the ordered parameters. These failures placed the residents at risk for adverse outcomes, medication errors, complications, and unmet needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 4 residents (Resident 13) reviewed for activities of daily living, received adequate bathing according to the resident's plan of care. This failure placed the resident at risk of poor hygiene and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure pharmacy recommendations were completed in the medical record for 2 of 6 residents (Residents 26 and 30) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This failure placed the residents at risk for delay in necessary medication changes, incomplete medical records, and adverse side effects.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff were compliant with Infection Prevention and Control Guidelines and standards of practice for 1 of 4 staff members (Staff T, Nursing Assistant Certified - NAC) reviewed for hand hygiene, 1 of 3 residents (Resident 35) reviewed for transmission-based precautions (TBP), and 1 of 1 residents (Resident 5) reviewed for oxygen use. The facility failed to ensure the staff were wearing appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) in accordance with recommended national standards, failed to ensure staff were compliant with appropriate hand hygiene practices during meal tray delivery, and failed to ensure oxygen tubing supplies were stored and maintained properly. These failures placed all residents and staff at risk of potential infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure 1 of 1 resident (Resident 1) who had a history of hypersexuality, and inappropriate touching was sufficiently supervised resulted in a resident-to-resident sexual contact. This failed practice placed Resident 1 and Resident 2 at risk of diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure there was sufficient nursing staff for 3 of 4 sampled residents (Residents 1, 2, and 4) reviewed for care and services. The facility had insufficient nursing staff to answer call lights and to provide care and services for a cognitively impaired resident resulting in the residents having unmet needs. These failures placed all residents at risk for accidents and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure professional standards were met for 2 of 2 halls (North and South) reviewed for medication administration, and 1 of 1 (Resident 27) residents reviewed for physician consultations. The facility failed to ensure that the paper medication administration record (MAR) had the physician orders printed clear and complete to allow for licensed staff to properly administer the prescribed medications during an internet outage where the licensed staff were unable to access the electronic medication administration records (eMAR). The facility failed to ensure the licensed staff followed a physician order, and failed to obtain a specialist referral that was ordered by the physician. These failures placed the residents at risk for adverse outcomes, medication errors, complications, and unmet needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure Nursing Assistants Certified (NACs) had the appropriate competencies, skills sets and proficiencies to provide nursing and related services for each resident in accordance with the facility assessment when nursing staff failed to demonstrate the knowledge, skills and abilities to perform nursing services for 5 of 5 sampled staff (Staff H, I, Q, R, and S) reviewed for competent nursing staff. 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 staff were compliant with Infection Prevention and Control Guidelines and standards of practice for 1 of 2 nurses (Staff D, Licensed Practical Nurse) during medication administration, for 1 of 1 laundry room, and failed to review and revise their infection control program annually. The facility failed to ensure the staff followed appropriate infection control practices during medication administration when the licensed staff did not use a barrier during medication administration or perform hand hygiene prior to administering medications. The facility failed to have a system in place where the staff were knowledgeable, trained and able to initiate appropriate processes for the handling of potential contaminated linens to prevent cross contamination. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had access to Saturday mail deliveries for 2 of 6 sampled residents (Residents 27 and 2) reviewed for mail delivery. The failure to ensure residents had access to Saturday mail services placed them at risk for isolation, frustration and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI), an assessment of a resident's needs, strengths, goals, and preferences, included thorough summaries of the Care Area Assessments (CAA), an assessment of a specific resident care or medical issue, to holistically analyze the plan of care for 3 of 4 residents (4, 9, and 33) reviewed for comprehensive assessments. This failure placed the residents at risk of not having appropriate services provided based on the resident's individualized needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with an indwelling urinary catheter (a hollow, partially flexible tube that collects urine from the bladder and leads to a drainage bag) received appropriate treatment and services to prevent catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs) for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident 3) reviewed for indwelling urinary catheter care/management. The facility failed to develop individualized plans for the prevention of CAUTIs including developing individualized, specific clinical indications for changing the catheters and/or catheter bags and to avoid routine irrigation/accessing of the closed catheter system. These failures placed residents with indwelling urinary catheters at an increased risk for UTI's and associated complications.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents remained free of unnecessary drugs for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident 10) reviewed for unnecessary drugs and for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 3) reviewed for bowel medications. The facility failed to provide nonpharmacological interventions for pain prior to giving as needed (PRN) pain medications and they failed to follow hold orders for bowel medications which resulted in the residents receiving unnecessary pain and bowel medications and placed them at risk for adverse medication-related side effects and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate clinical records for 1 of 4 sampled residents (Resident 3) reviewed for urinary catheter care and services. The failure to consistently document urinary catheter output per the resident's orders placed the resident at risk for hydration issues, unmet care needs, and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the infection prevention and control Antibiotic Stewardship Program (ASP, a system-wide implementation of measures for monitoring/tracking of antibiotics along with reducing the risk of unnecessary antibiotic use) was implemented for one of two residents (Resident 3). This failure increased the resident's risk for development of multidrug-resistant organisms (a bacteria that are resistant to many antibiotics) along with the potential for unidentified nursing care trends that identify risk related to infection prevention. This failure had the potential for adverse outcomes associated with unnecessary or inappropriate antibiotic use and a decrease in quality of life for all facility residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to develop, implement and maintain an in-service training program to ensure 2 of 2 Nursing Assistants (Staff H and I) reviewed for the required 12 hour per year nurse aide training received the required amount of annual training. The failure to ensure Nursing Assistants Certified (NACs) received 12 hours per year in-service training placed residents at risk of less than competent care and services from staff.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure resident with diabetes mellitus 2 (DM- a medical condition in which the body doesn't use insulin properly), received care and services needed to manage their blood glucose (BG - the amount of concentrated sugar in the blood) for 1 of 4 sampled residents (Resident 1) reviewed for diabetic management. This failure place other residents at risk for unmet care needs and medical complications. Findings Included . Review of the facility policy titled, Diabetes Mellitus, Guidelines for Management, revised 08/01/2023, documented the goal was to quickly restore normal cerebral function, prevent hyperglycemia (high BG) or hypoglycemia (low BG), recognize, treat, or prevent complications commonly associated with DM. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure behavioral health needs were identified and met for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 2) reviewed for behavioral-emotional health. Failure to identify behavioral health needs and utilize person-centered interventions developed by an interdisciplinary team (IDT) placed residents with behavioral needs, at risk for unidentified behavior triggers, unmet behavioral needs, refusal of care, self-neglect, lack of behavioral services and support, loss of dignity, and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure pharmacy services were provided to meet the residents needs for 3 of 4 residents (Resident 1, 2, and 3) reviewed for new admissions. The facility's failure to ensure medications were acquired and administered as ordered on the day of admission and the facility's failure to follow their process for when medications were not available placed residents at risk of diminished quality of health and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, and interview, the facility failed to provide a clean and sanitary environment for 1 of 1 residents' shower room. This failed practice decreased Resident 4's desire to bathe, did not promote a clean and comfortable environment for the residents to be bathed and placed the residents at risk of a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 1 resident (Resident 1) reviewed for respiratory care and services was provided care consistent with professional standards of practice. The facility failed to ensure there was a physician order in place prior to administering a continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) machine (a medical device that provides pressurized air) was set to the ordered flow rate. This failure placed residents at risk for receiving care and services that were not physician ordered, unmet care needs, diminished quality of life and negative outcomes.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure staff provided the necessary assessment, interventions, monitoring of the impacted skin area, and care for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 1) who was identified to have a Deep Tissue Injury (DTI) from a knee brace/immobilizer and subsequently developed an avoidable unstageable pressure ulcer/pressure Injury (PU/PI). Resident 1 experienced harm when they developed an unidentified wound to the area under their brace (also known as an immobilizer - a medical device that stabilizes your knee joint and holds it in place) and this practice placed all other residents with a brace or appliance at risk of the development of a PU/PI. The facility corrected the above deficient practice prior to the initiation of the abbreviated survey on 12/21/2023. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 1), reviewed for falls, received supervision with two-person assist with transfers and was not left unattended while on a bedside commode (BSC), had the effectiveness of current interventions evaluated, and had additional fall measures implemented to prevent future falls. Resident 1 was harmed when they had five falls within a nine-week period from their admission to the facility while they were self-transferring to or from the toilet or BSC, and during the last fall, the resident experienced a fractured hip. This failed practice placed all residents at risk for prevention of falls and possible injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to thoroughly provide professional standards of care and services, for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 1) reviewed for wound care. The facility failed to timely and accurately assess the resident's surgical wound site, follow physician orders as indicated post-surgical amputation of a toe on the resident's right foot, monitor and assess other open areas to the resident's right foot, left foot, and coccyx (tailbone), manage a wound vac (vacuum assisted closure device that assists in wound healing) device, and communicate concerns and status of the surgical wound to the surgeon. Resident 1 experienced harm, when they were hospitalized for significant worsening of their surgical wound site on their right foot that contributed to a below knee amputation (BKA) of their right leg.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a dignified existence was maintained for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident 1) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure Resident 1 was dressed appropriately when they were sent out on public transportation to their dialysis treatment for up to 6 hours. This failure placed the resident at risk for a diminished self-worth and a diminished quality of life when they felt exposed at a public appointment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure pneumococcal vaccines (a vaccine that protects against pneumococcal infections that can lead to serious infections such as pneumonia and blood infections) were offered to 1 of 5 residents (Resident 2) reviewed for immunizations and infection control. This failed practice placed the residents at risk for illness, spread of a communicable disease and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a consistent activity program to meet the needs of 5 of 7 seven (Resident 2, 23, 13, 16, and 18) residents reviewed for activities. This failure created the potential for residents to miss out on opportunities of interest to maintain a meaningful life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan, based on the activity assessment, for two of seven residents (Resident 2 and 23) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. This failure created the potential to negatively impact the residents' quality of life.
35 fire safety citations on file: 9 on August 7, 2025, 13 on July 30, 2024, 13 on July 28, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| February 13, 2026 | Fine | $10,545 |
| January 9, 2024 | Fine | $12,048 |
| October 19, 2023 | Fine | $41,291 |
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) | 3.93 | 4.36 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 1.22 | 0.94 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.50 | 3.80 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.17 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.54 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 62.5% | 45.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 62.5% | 45.4% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.99 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 4.10 on weekdays and 3.50 on weekends, 15% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 22.7% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.87 in April to June 2025 to 3.93 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 | 3.93 | 1.22 | 4.10 | 3.50 | 22.7% | 0 of 90 | 37 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.68 | 1.29 | 3.92 | 3.07 | 8.1% | 0 of 92 | 36 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.01 | 1.44 | 4.28 | 3.33 | 7.5% | 0 of 92 | 36 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.87 | 1.24 | 4.14 | 3.17 | 21.1% | 0 of 91 | 38 |
| 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.
| 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 | 6.8 | 14.2 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.8 | 1.6 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.3 | 2.6 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.8 | 1.3 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.3 | 17.2 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.9 | 4.3 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 17.6 | 15.1 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 27.7 | 19.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 5.8 | 13.4 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Highland Health and Rehabilitation of Cascadia's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (46.2% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
46.2% 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. 63 eligible stays.
10.2% 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. 60 eligible stays.
6.3% 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. 42 eligible stays.
46.1% 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. 39 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. 56 residents counted.
1.6% 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. 56 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. 23 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: BELLINGHAM SOUTH OF CASCADIA, LLC. CMS links this home to Cascadia Healthcare, a group of 47 nursing homes averaging 3.1 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cascadia Washington Operations LLC | Direct ownership interest | Organization | 08/01/2022 | |
| Cascadia Hc Group LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 06/05/2025 | |
| Cascadia Healthcare LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 08/01/2022 | |
| Cascadia Holdco LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 06/05/2025 | |
| Hammond, Owen | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 08/01/2022 | |
| Laforte, Stephen | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 06/05/2025 | |
| Nelson, Timothy | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 06/05/2025 | |
| White Oak Healthcare Finance LLC | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 08/11/2022 | |
| Cascadia Services LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 01/08/2025 | |
| Dhaliwal, Navdeep | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/09/2023 | |
| Hammond, Owen | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/05/2025 | |
| Laforte, Stephen | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/05/2025 | |
| Nelson, Timothy | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/05/2025 | |
| Vance, Nathan | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/23/2026 | |
| Cascadia Services LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/08/2025 | |
| Timberline Ohi Tenant LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/05/2025 | |
| Dhaliwal, Navdeep | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/14/2025 | |
| Vance, Nathan | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/09/2026 |
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.