Home / Washington / Vancouver
2811 Ne 139th Street, Vancouver, WA 98686 · Clark County · (360) 574-5247
120 certified beds, about 108 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 2011
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 505522 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on January 9, 2026, inspectors cited 15 health deficiencies (the Washington average is 15.8, the national average 9.2).
None of its 48 health citations since September 2023 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.98 hours per resident per day, against 4.36 across Washington and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.78 of those hours.
57.2% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Washington average 45.1%).
CMS links it to Hill Valley Healthcare, an affiliated group of 43 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 48 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive individualized care plan was developed with specific information for that resident for 4 of 7 sampled residents (1, 4, 5, and 6) reviewed for care plans. This failure placed residents at risk for unmet care needs and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors when medications were not administered in accordance with provider orders and/or within the standard practice administration parameters for 3 of 7 sampled residents (Resident 1, 2, and 6) reviewed for significant medication errors. This failure placed residents at risk of adverse medical conditions, a change in health conditions, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to consistently conduct and document pre and post dialysis (a life sustaining treatment for kidney failure) assessments designed to ensure consistent ongoing communication and collaboration with the dialysis facility and failed to follow physicians' orders pertaining to dialysis treatment, for 1 of 1 resident (Resident 3) reviewed for dialysis. This failure had the potential to place residents who receive dialysis at risk for unmet care needs and dialysis related complications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure expired and/or BUE (beyond-use date) medications were discarded when expired from 2 of 5 medication carts (Cart B & Cart E) reviewed. The facility also failed to store medication in residents' room in a locked container for 1 of 1 resident reviewed (Resident 80). This failure placed residents at risk of not receiving the full benefits of the medication, equipment, supplies, and at risk for accessing unsecured medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff performed hand hygiene during the lunch hallway meal pass for 1 of 5 hallways (C-Wing) reviewed for lunch meal pass. This failure to perform proper hand hygiene placed residents at risk of cross-contamination, food borne illness and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to obtain a signed consent before administering a psychotropic medication (medications capable of affecting the mind, emotions, and behaviors) for 1 of 5 residents (Resident 6) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This failure placed the resident at risk of not being fully informed of the risks and benefits before making decisions about medications, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who had personal fund accounts established, received accrued interest on those accounts for 3 of 3 sampled residents (Residents 16, 76, and 98) reviewed for Trust Funds interest accrued. This failure placed residents at risk not to receive or have access to monies owed to them.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a Medicare Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage (SNF ABN - a notice of Medicare non-coverage and residents assumption of financial responsibility) to 1 of 3 residents (Resident 16) reviewed for beneficiary notification. This failure placed residents at risk of not being informed of services and related changesFindings included. Resident 16 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The Annual Minimum Data Set, an assessment tool, dated 12/31/2025, documented Resident 16 was severely cognitively impaired. Record review of Resident 16's Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) form, dated 09/03/2025, showed Resident 16's representative received a call on 09/03/2025, informing them that Resident 16's Medicare Part A coverage would end on 09/05/2025. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, observation and record review, the facility failed to maintain a clean homelike environment by not ensuring resident rooms were cleaned for 1 of 11 rooms (C Wing, room [ROOM NUMBER]) reviewed for environment. This failure placed residents at risk for a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete an AIMS (Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale) test (a rating scale used to assess the severity of involuntary movements that sometimes develop as a side effect of treatment with antipsychotic medications [drugs used primarily to treat symptoms such as hallucinations and delusions]) for 2 of 5 sampled residents (Resident 4 &118) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This failure placed residents at risk for adverse medication side-effects, medical complications, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a written transfer/discharge notice was provided to the resident or the resident representative in a language and manner they understood for 1 of 1 residents (Resident 115) reviewed for hospitalization. This failure placed the resident at risk for not knowing the reason for their transfer or have the opportunity to make decisions about their transfer/discharge rights.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS, an assessment tool) was completed accurately to reflect a resident's health status and/or care needs for 2 of 2 sampled residents (Residents 39 and 22) reviewed for resident assessment. This failure placed residents at risk for unidentified and/or unmet care needs and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident 116) reviewed for comfort care (medical focus shifts from curing an illness to providing relief from pain and symptoms). This failure placed residents at risk of unmet care needs and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide assistance with grooming for 1 of 4 residents (Resident 80) reviewed for activities of daily living. This failure placed residents at risk of unmet care needs and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure bowel interventions were initiated for 1 of 8 sampled residents (Resident 74) reviewed for quality of care and failed to perform ordered weights for 1 of 5 residents (Resident 13) reviewed for weights. This failure placed residents at risk for discomfort, health complications and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to obtain physician orders for oxygen use for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident 83) reviewed for respiratory care. This failure placed residents at risk for worsening health complications, unmet care needs, and a diminished quality of life. Findings Included. Record review of the facility's policy titled, Oxygen Administration, undated, documented .1. Verify that there is a physician's order for this procedure. Review the physician's orders or facility protocol for oxygen administration. Resident 83 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], discharged return anticipated on 12/19/2025, and re-admitted on [DATE] on hospice. The admission Minimum Data Set, (an assessment tool) dated 11/11/2025, showed Resident 83 was cognitively intact and was on oxygen therapy. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident census and nursing hours were accurately posted and/or updated daily for 30 of 30 days reviewed for nurse staff postings. This failure placed residents, resident representatives, and visitors at risk of not being fully informed of the current staffing levels and resident census information.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff properly donned (putting on) personal protective equipment (PPE) for 1 of 3 sampled resident rooms (room [ROOM NUMBER]) reviewed for infection prevention and control. This failure placed residents at risk for the spread of infection transmission in the facility and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide activities of daily living (ADL's) for resident's dependent on staff assistance related to bathing for two of three sampled residents (Resident 1 & 2) reviewed for ADLs. This failure placed residents at risk for unmet needs, poor hygiene, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors when medications were not administered in accordance with provider orders for 2 of 5 sampled residents (Residents 2 &4) reviewed for significant medication errors. This failure placed residents at risk of adverse medical conditions, a change in health condition, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure prescriptions provided on discharge accurately reflected the residents reconciled medication list in the discharge summary for 1 of 5 sample residents (Resident 3) reviewed. This facility failure placed residents at risk for adverse medication side effects, changes in health conditions, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from medication and/ or treatment errors when medications and or treatments were not administered in accordance with provider orders for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 1) reviewed for medication errors. This failure placed residents at risk of adverse medical conditions, a change in health conditions, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and records review, the facility failed to inform the physician about a significant change in the residents' physical condition for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 1) reviewed for notice of changes. This failure placed residents at risk of adverse medical conditions and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide bathing assistance for 1 of 3 (Resident 1) residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living care. This failure placed residents at risk of adverse medical conditions and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to assess and accurately document a residents wound for 1 of 3 residents (Resident 1) sampled for wound care. This failure placed residents at risk of adverse medical conditions and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident 1 was free from significant medication errors when medications were not administered in accordance with provider orders for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 1) reviewed for significant medication errors. This failure placed residents at risk of adverse medical conditions, a change in health conditions, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received information about the risk and benefits and failed to obtain the resident's informed consent prior to the administration of psychotropic medications for 2 of 6 sampled residents (32 & 78) reviewed for right to be informed and make treatment decisions. These failures placed residents and/or their representatives at risk of not being fully informed about the care and treatment related to the risks and benefits associated with psychotropic medications and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to accurately assess significant weight loss for 1 of 1 sampled resident (71) reviewed for assessment accuracy. This failure placed residents at risk for nutritional and functional decline in overall health status and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the recommendations of the Preadmission Screen and Resident Review (PASARR) Level II were followed for 1 of 1 sampled resident (23) reviewed for PASARR. This failure placed residents at risk of not receiving the necessary mental health services and a diminished quality of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to a baseline care plan was not developed to address falls and communication for 2 of 8 sampled residents (66 & 82) reviewed for baseline care plans. This failure placed residents at risk for unmet care needs and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure ongoing neurological assessments (assess the nervous system and identify any abnormalities that affect function and activities of daily living) were performed after an unwitnessed fall for 1 of 2 sampled residents (66); failed to ensure daily weights were obtained for 2 of 9 sampled residents (75 & 288) reviewed for weight management; failed to ensure the bowel protocol was initiated for 2 of 7 sampled residents (24 & 73) and failed to ensure dental services were obtained for 1 of 1 sampled resident (53) reviewed for quality of care related to neurological assessments, weight management, bowel management, and dental services. These failures placed residents at risk for worsening conditions, health complications and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) when providing medical device care and wound care for 4 of 5 sampled residents (62, 240, 241 & 339) reviewed for infection prevention and control. These failures placed residents, staff, and visitors at risk for contracting infectious diseases and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify a resident's family and/or representative of a positive COVID-19 (Coronavirus - a contagious disease) results for 1 of 5 sampled residents (75) reviewed for infection prevention and control. This failure placed residents and/or resident's representative at risk of not being knowledgeable to make decisions about their care in relation to the facility's COVID-19 management plan and a diminished quality of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive individualized care plan was developed with specific information for that resident for 6 of 6 sampled residents (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6) reviewed for care plans. This failure placed residents at risk for unmet care needs and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors when medications were not administered in accordance with provider orders for 4 of 6 sampled residents (Residents 1, 2, 5, & 6) reviewed for significant medication errors. This failure placed residents at risk of adverse medical conditions, a change in health condition and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure fall mats (a cushioned surface used for the purpose of reducing injuries from falls) were in place on either side of the resident's bed, as directed in the comprehensive care plan, for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident 1) reviewed for accident hazards. This failure placed residents at risk of a fall with injury and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from medication errors when medication orders for bedside administration were not followed for 1 of 7 sampled residents (1) reviewed for medication errors. This failure placed residents at risk for a decline in medical condition and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medication refrigerator temperature logs were consistently maintained in 2 of 2 sampled medication rooms (1st Floor and 2nd Floor) reviewed for medication storage. This failure placed residents at risk for receiving compromised or ineffective medications with unknown potency.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents and/or resident representatives were informed and provided consent before administering a psychotropic (mind altering) medication for 2 of 5 sampled residents (29 & 21) reviewed for right to be informed and make treatment decisions related to unnecessary medications. This failure placed residents and/or resident representatives at risk of not being fully informed of the risks and benefits before making decisions about psychotropic medications and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to obtain, provide, and/or assist with completing advanced directives (ADs) for 3 of 16 sampled residents (38, 54, and 278) reviewed for ADs. This failure placed residents at risk for losing their right to have their health care preferences and/or have their decisions honored.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a written notice of transfer to the resident and/or the resident's representative describing the reason for transfer for 2 of 5 sampled residents (10 & 33) reviewed for transfer notification requirement. This failure placed residents at risk of not being informed of their condition, unmet care needs and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a written Bed-Hold notice to the resident or resident's representative at the time of transfer to the hospital for 4 of 5 sampled residents (10, 40, 13 & 33) reviewed for bed hold notifications. This failure placed residents at risk for lack of knowledge regarding their right to hold their bed while in the hospital.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement a care plan related to nephrostomy tube (a tube that drains urine from the kidney to an external bag) for 1 of 3 sampled residents (13) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. catheter care. This failure placed residents at risk of unmet care needs, delayed care, and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to initiate bowel interventions for 2 of 2 sampled residents (10 & 268) and failed to perform ongoing neurological assessments (assesses the nervous system and identifies abnormalities affecting function and activities of daily living) for a resident after an unwitnessed falls for 2 of 5 sampled residents (21 & 26) reviewed for quality care related to bowel management and neurological assessments. These failures placed residents at risk for interventions not be intimated, discomfort, health complications and a diminished qualify of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident weights were monitored per physician orders for 1 of 5 sampled residents (13) reviewed for nutrition. This failure placed residents at risk of malnutrition, delayed wound-healing, and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure consistent and ongoing communication and collaboration with the dialysis facility regarding dialysis treatment and care for 1 of 2 sampled residents (26) reviewed for dialysis. This failure placed residents at risk of unidentified medical complications and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure nursing hours were posted daily for 22 of 30 days reviewed for nurse staff posting. This failure placed residents, resident representatives, and visitors at risk of not being fully informed of the current staffing levels and census.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure activities of daily living (ADLs) for residents dependent on staff assistance were provided related to bathing for 7 of 10 sampled residents (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7) reviewed for ADLs for dependent residents. This failure placed residents at risk for poor hygiene and a diminished quality of life.
44 fire safety citations on file: 5 on January 9, 2026, 11 on October 25, 2024, 28 on December 8, 2023.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
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) | 3.98 | 4.36 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.78 | 0.94 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.48 | 3.80 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.18 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.02 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 57.2% | 45.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 52.9% | 45.4% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.86 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 4.18 on weekdays and 3.48 on weekends, 17% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 15.9% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.65 in April to June 2025 to 3.98 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 | 3.98 | 0.78 | 4.18 | 3.48 | 15.9% | 0 of 90 | 108 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.93 | 0.67 | 4.12 | 3.47 | 11.9% | 0 of 92 | 107 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.89 | 0.53 | 4.05 | 3.48 | 14.4% | 0 of 92 | 109 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.65 | 0.51 | 3.82 | 3.23 | 18.4% | 0 of 91 | 104 |
| 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 | 8.1 | 14.2 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.4 | 1.0 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 1.6 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.1 | 2.6 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.9 | 17.2 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.4 | 4.3 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 20.4 | 15.1 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 28.8 | 19.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 16.6 | 13.4 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Salmon Creek Post Acute & Rehabilitation's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (69.0% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
69.0% this home
Better than 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. 372 eligible stays.
10.6% 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. 346 eligible stays.
4.5% 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. 208 eligible stays.
57.2% 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. 180 residents counted.
0.4% 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. 253 residents counted.
0.5% 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. 253 residents counted.
95.9% 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. 170 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: SALMON CREEK SNF OPERATIONS LLC. CMS links this home to Hill Valley Healthcare, a group of 43 nursing homes averaging 1.7 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wash 6 SNF Operations Holdings LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 02/08/2023 |
| Idels, Shimon | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Schwartz, Steven | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Salmon Creek SNF Operations Manager LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 04/01/2023 | |
| Idels, Shimon | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Schwartz, Steven | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2023 |
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.