405 West Seventh Street, Silverton, ID 83867 · Shoshone County · (208) 556-1147
55 certified beds, about 48 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1974
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 135058 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 10, 2026, inspectors cited 3 health deficiencies (the Idaho average is 10.3, the national average 9.2).
Of 32 health citations since October 2023, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $41,954 in the last three years; the largest was $41,954, and the latest is dated October 4, 2023.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.29 hours per resident per day, against 4.04 across Idaho and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.56 of those hours.
51.1% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Idaho average 50.3%).
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 32 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff and resident interviews, and policy review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure resident's comprehensive care plans were revised to reflect current needs and interventions. This was true for 1 of 12 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for care plans. This placed residents at risk of adverse outcomes if care and services were not provided due to care plans not being revised as residents' needs changed.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to monitor vital signs as ordered by the physician. This was true for 1 of 12 residents (Resident #46) whose records were reviewed for quality of care. This deficient practice created the potential for harm if physician's orders were not followed, and if out-of-parameter vital signs were not monitored for resident safety.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to complete an assessment for a wheelchair alarm prior to implementation. This was true for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #18) whose record was reviewed for comprehensive assessments. This deficient practice created the potential for psychosocial harm if Resident #18 felt restrained and physical harm if Resident #18 was not properly assessed prior to restraint placement.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and resident and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to provide food which was palatable and within resident's preferred temperature. This was true for all residents eating meals prepared by the facility. This deficient practice created the potential for decreased quality of life, incomplete meal intake due to dissatisfaction with meals.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and the FDA Food Code, it was determined the facility failed to provide a clean and sanitary environment when staff were observed without appropriate beard guard facial covers while in food preparation areas. This deficient practice created the potential for harm by placing residents at risk for potential foodborne illness, physical food contaminants, and adverse health outcomes.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure the discharge process notified required entities. This was true for 4 of 4 residents (#2, #7, #39, and #50) whose discharges were reviewed. The failure of the facility to notify the Office of the State LTC Ombudsman of each residents' discharge denied the residents added protection and advocacy of their right from being inappropriately transferred or discharged .
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure Schedule II controlled substances were stored in a permanently affixed, secured compartment. This failure created the potential for drug diversion and misappropriation.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were provided treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, and the residents goals and preferences. This was true for 1 of 15 residents (Resident #35) whose records were reviewed for quality of care. This failure created the potential for harm for Resident #35 when she experienced a change in condition, was not provided a nursing assessment, and diagnostic testing was delayed.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure effective pain management was provided to residents. This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #5) whose record was reviewed for pain management. This failure resulted in ongoing pain when Resident #5 was not evaluated to determine whether the current pain management plan was effective.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were supplied with routine medications as ordered. This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #5) reviewed for medication availability. This failure created the potential for harm if Resident #5 experienced worsening anemia requiring timely supplementation.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure resident records were maintained accurately and completely. This was true for 2 of 15 residents (#2 and #3) whose records were reviewed for accuracy. This failure created the potential for miscommunication and delayed treatment when documentation was missing or inaccurate.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to provide sanitary storage of PPE, and to perform appropriate hand hygiene. This was true for 2 of 15 residents (#6 and #33) whose staff infection control interactions were observed. This deficient practice created the potential for harm to residents if staff failed to provide appropriate infection control practices during wound care, medication administration, and PPE storage.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, review of the State Agency's Long-Term Care Reporting Portal, and review of I&As, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents are free from abuse. This was true for 3 of 3 residents (Resident #9, #30, #51) whose records were reviewed for abuse. This created the potential for harm when Residents #9, #30, and #51 were struck by Resident #8.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure professional standards of practice were followed for 5 of 5 residents (#4, #7, #26, #40, and #41) reviewed for bowel and bladder care. This failed practice created the potential for each of these residents to experience discomfort when their medications were not administered according to the physician's order.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure (a) food was stored in a safe and sanitary manner and (b) drink wear was maintained in sanitary conditions. This deficient practice created the potential to affect 49 of 49 residents who consumed food and drinks prepared by the facility. This placed residents at risk for adverse outcomes, including food-borne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure Residents were monitored adequately to ensure residents were free from chemical restraints. This was true for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #23) whose records were reviewed for unnecessary medication. This failure caused the potential for more than minimal harm when Resident #23 was not able to participate in activities of daily living.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) Manual, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents' Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessments included correct assessment information. This was true for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #39) whose MDS records were reviewed for accuracy. This deficient practice had the potential for negative outcomes if residents were not assessed and/or monitored due to inaccurate assessments.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents' care plans were revised according to their needs. This was true for 1 of 13 residents (Resident #8) whose records were reviewed for care plan timing and revisions. This failure created the potential for harm when residents' needs were not identified and or met.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of incident and accidents (I&A), staff interview, and The State Operation Manual, it was determined the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision was provided to prevent falls. This was true for 1 of 1 resident, (Resident #8) whose record was reviewed for falls. This had the potential to cause more than minimal harm to resident #8.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation,resident and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure respiratory services were provided. This was true for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #14) whose record was reviewed for respiratory services. This failure created the potential for harm when Resident #14's continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) machine (a non-invasive ventilation machine) was not applied at bedtime.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure nursing staff were educated on identifying mood, behaviors, and side effects. This failure created the potential for adverse outcomes when residents' records were not accurately reflecting residents' current condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) was on-site for 8 consecutive hours a day, for 7 days a week, to provide care to the residents. This was true for 3 of 21 days reviewed for sufficient staffing. This failure placed all residents at risk for harm if their routine and/ or emergency needs could not be met without the care of a registered nurse.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure Resident records contained accurate documentation. This was true for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #8 and #14) whose records were reviewed for accuracy. This failure had the potential for adverse outcomes and harm when Resident #8's record documents an inaccurate weight and when Resident #14's record documented inaccuracy of administration of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) machine (a non-invasive ventilation machine) use.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure the Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee took action to identify and resolve systemic problems. This failure affected 49 of 49 residents residing in the facility. The deficient practice resulted in failure to identify resident mood, behaviors, and side effects for adverse outcomes when residents' record were not accurately documenting the residents current condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, CDC recommendation review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure infection control and prevention practices were maintained. This failure had the potential to impact all residents in the facility by placing them at risk for cross contamination and transmission of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were free of significant medication errors. This was true for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #8) whose medications were reviewed. This failure created harm to Resident #8 when she received an incorrect administration of medication requiring hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on staff interview, personnel record review, and administrative record review, it was determined the facility failed to ensure nurse aides and licensed nurses had completed competencies necessary to care for resident's needs. This was true for 16 of 19 CNAs (#1-#16) and 8 out of 9 licensed nurses (RN#1-#5) and (LPN#1-#3) whose training information was reviewed. This failure had the potential to affect all residents in the facility and increased the risk of harm to residents if CNAs and licensed nurses were not determined competent to provide care and services to residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, record review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident's representative was immediately notified when the resident had changes in condition. This was true for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #1 and #8) whose records were reviewed for changes of condition. This deficient practice placed residents at risk of harm due to lack of advocacy and support from their representatives.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure resident care plans were revised to reflect current needs and interventions. This was true for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #2) whose care plans were reviewed. This placed Resident #2 at risk for adverse outcomes when his care plan was not revised to meet his needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure accuracy of narcotic counts. This was true of 2 of 8 residents (#1 and #2) whose narcotic logs were reviewed. This failure created the potential for undetected misuse and/or diversion of controlled medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, policy review, and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were monitored appropriately and offered non-pharmacological interventions while receiving opioid pain medications. This was true for 2 of 3 residents (#1 and #2) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This failure created the potential for residents to experience adverse reactions due to a lack of appropriate monitoring or increased pain due to not offering non-pharmacological interventions.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, it was determined the facility failed to safeguard medical records from unauthorized use. This was true for all residents whose records were accessed by a facility MA (MA #1) for the purpose of medication administration on 10/2/23 and 10/3/23. This deficient practice resulted in MA #1 accessing medical records, using an individualized login identifier which belonged to a facility RN (RN #2), and created the potential for harm when the access was documented incorrectly, and confidentiality of the records was not maintained.
12 fire safety citations on file: 6 on July 10, 2026, 1 on June 27, 2025, 5 on August 6, 2021.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| October 4, 2023 | Fine | $41,954 |
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 | Idaho | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.29 | 4.04 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.56 | 0.86 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.75 | 3.49 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.13 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.59 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 51.1% | 50.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 66.7% | 40.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.22 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 3.50 on weekdays and 2.75 on weekends, 21% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 7.1% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 2.97 in April to June 2025 to 3.29 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 | 3.29 | 0.56 | 3.50 | 2.75 | 7.1% | 0 of 90 | 48 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.07 | 0.51 | 3.33 | 2.42 | 5.4% | 0 of 92 | 47 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.30 | 0.55 | 3.54 | 2.69 | 5.5% | 0 of 92 | 47 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 2.97 | 0.37 | 3.22 | 2.34 | 6.2% | 5 of 91 | 48 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Idaho, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.90 | 0.80 | 4.11 | 3.37 | 4.9% | 0.2% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Idaho, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.58 | $17.45 to $22.23 | 7,910 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $30.67 | $28.04 to $35.60 | 1,880 |
| Registered nurses | $44.45 | $38.90 to $49.19 | 16,880 |
| 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 | Idaho | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 20.5 | 15.6 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.2 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.4 | 2.0 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.0 | 3.0 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.0 | 1.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 16.8 | 16.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.8 | 3.2 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 20.4 | 20.1 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 19.3 | 17.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 22.1 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.3 | 1.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 4.2 | 1.7 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Silverton Health and Rehabilitation of Cascadia's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it worse than the national rate (37.3% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
37.3% this home
Worse than the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Idaho: 18 better, 3 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. 38 eligible stays.
9.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Idaho: 3 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. 40 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 7.1% · Idaho: 1 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. 20 eligible stays.
39.1% this home
Median of homes: Idaho62.2% · 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. 23 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Idaho0.0% · 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. 34 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Idaho1.1% · 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. 34 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Idaho98.1% · 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. 8 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: SILVERTON 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 Idaho Operations LLC | Direct ownership interest | Organization | 03/01/2023 | |
| Cascadia Hc Group LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 06/05/2025 | |
| Cascadia Healthcare LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 03/01/2023 | |
| Cascadia Holdco LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 06/05/2025 | |
| Hammond, Owen | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 03/01/2023 | |
| Laforte, Stephen | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 06/05/2025 | |
| Nelson, Timothy | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 06/05/2025 | |
| Silverton 405 Realty, LLC | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 06/05/2025 | |
| White Oak Healthcare Finance LLC | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 08/11/2022 | |
| Cascadia Services LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 10/21/2022 | |
| Hammond, Owen | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/01/2023 | |
| Laforte, Stephen | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/05/2025 | |
| Meza, Michael | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/01/2023 | |
| Nahmensen, Robert | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/24/2023 | |
| Nelson, Timothy | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/05/2025 | |
| Cascadia Services LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 02/12/2025 | |
| Meza, Michael | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/12/2025 | |
| Nahmensen, Robert | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/12/2025 |
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 Idaho. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.