525 W. Umpqua Street, Roseburg, OR 97471 · Douglas County · (541) 464-7100
118 certified beds, about 87 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1979
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 385143 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on August 22, 2025, inspectors cited 6 health deficiencies (the Oregon average is 9.2, the national average 9.2).
None of its 44 health citations since February 2023 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $8,824 in the last three years; the largest was $8,824, and the latest is dated May 17, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 4.58 hours per resident per day, against 5.03 across Oregon and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.57 of those hours.
42.7% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Oregon average 47.4%).
CMS links it to Volare Health, an affiliated group of 16 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 44 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure narcotic records were maintained accurately, and an account of all controlled substances were kept for 4 of 4 medication carts reviewed for medication administration. This placed residents at risk for drug diversion.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents were free from unnecessary medications and provide rationale for PRN psychoactive medication beyond 14 days for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#75) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for adverse side effects.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 of 4 sampled residents (# 17) reviewed for accidents. This placed residents at risk for increased falls.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide therapy services for 1 of 1 sampled residents (#78) reviewed for rehabilitation. This placed residents at risk for functional decline and immobility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to follow proper infection control precautions for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#60) reviewed for infection control. This placed residents at risk for cross contamination and risk of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure air conditioning units were free from leaks and bathroom doors were operational in resident rooms for 2 of 5 facility hallways reviewed for physical environment. This placed residents at risk for an unsafe, lack of privacy and unsanitary environment that was not homelike.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide sufficient staffing to meet the needs of residents for 1 of 7 sampled resident (#77) and 1 of 1 facility reviewed for staffing. This placed residents at risk for unmet needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure CNA staff annual performance reviews were completed for 5 of 5 sampled CNA staff (#s 24, 25, 26, 27 and 28) reviewed for staffing. This placed residents at risk for a lack of competent staff.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to post accurate and complete staffing information for 1 of 1 facility reviewed for staffing. This placed residents at risk for incomplete and inaccurate staffing information.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined to facility failed to consistently monitor residents for adverse side effects to anticoagulant medication for 3 of 5 (#s 18, 32 and 52) sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. This placed residents at risk for adverse side effects to medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to consistently and thoroughly monitor residents on psychotropic medications for 4 of 6 sampled residents (#s 4, 18, 52 and 77) reviewed for psychotropic medications and change of condition. This placed residents at risk for receiving unnecessary psychotropic medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to implement EBP (Enhanced Barrier Precautions: implementation of personal protective equipment [gown, gloves, masks and/or goggles] when a resident has an indwelling medical device or wound) timely for 4 of 9 sampled residents (#s 6, 9, 32, and 127) reviewed for infection control and unnecessary medications. This placed residents at risk for cross-contamination.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure antibiotic stewardship for 3 of 9 sampled residents (#s 1, 32, and 77) reviewed for infection control, UTIs and change of condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide medication-related risk and benefits information to residents or resident representatives prior to administration for 2 of 6 sampled residents (#s 77 and 52) reviewed for medications. This placed residents and resident representatives at risk for lack of informed consent.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determine the facility failed to honor a resident's right to refuse a transfer to another room for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#25) reviewed for positioning. This placed residents at risk for lack of honored choices.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to issue a Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) for 1 of 3 (#378) sampled residents reviewed for beneficiary notification. This placed residents at risk for lack of appeal information.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to resolve a resident's report of missing clothing for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#6) reviewed for personal property. This placed residents at risk for missing items.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to report allegations of abuse and misappropriation to the state agency or local law enforcement for 2 of 6 sampled residents (#s 1 and 47) reviewed for abuse and medications. This placed residents at risk for abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to complete thorough investigations for allegations of abuse for 2 of 6 sampled residents (#s 1 and 47) reviewed for abuse and medications. This placed residents at risk for abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a safe and orderly discharge for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#77) reviewed for discharge. This placed residents at risk for unmet medications needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident was provided an activity program for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#63) reviewed for activities. This placed residents at risk for decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to respond to changes in condition in a timely manner and failed to follow physician orders for 3 of 9 sampled residents (#s 32, 52 and 77) reviewed for change of condition, pain, and medications. This placed residents at risk for delay of treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide appropriate foot care for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#77) reviewed for ADLs. This placed residents at risk for lack of nail care, pain, and increased infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident's environment remained free from smoking hazards for 1 of 6 sampled residents (#57) reviewed for accidents. This placed residents at risk for a hazardous environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident was evaluated timely after weight loss for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#127) reviewed for nutrition. This placed residents at risk for continued weight loss.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide pain management for 3 of 10 sampled residents (#s 32, 61, and 77) reviewed for pain management, change of condition and unnecessary medications. This placed residents at risk for lack of pain control.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to consistently monitor a dialysis access site for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#26) reviewed for dialysis. This placed residents at risk for dialysis complications. Resident 26 admitted to the facility in 2020 with diagnoses including stroke and end stage renal disease. An order dated 3/12/24 instructed staff to monitor the resident's dialysis access site for bruit (whooshing) and thrill (vibration) twice a day. A review of the clinical record revealed the site was monitored for bruit and thrill 11 of 39 opportunities in 3/2024, 14 of 60 opportunities in 4/2024, and one time in 32 opportunities in 5/2024. On 5/17/24 at 9:59 AM Staff 14 (LPN Unit Manager) was asked about dialysis monitoring. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure pneumonia vaccines were offered for 2 of 5 sampled residents (#s 42 and 67). This placed residents at risk for respiratory illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide abuse training for 3 of 5 (#'s 26, 27, and 28) staff reviewed for abuse training. This placed residents at risk for abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure food was served at the proper temperature to prevent avoidable burns for 1 of 4 sampled residents (#4) reviewed for food temperature. This placed residents at risk for oral burns.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure the time between the start of the evening meal and the start of the breakfast meal did not exceed 14 hours without providing a substantial evening snack and snacks were suitable and available at non-traditional times for 1 of 1 facility, 1 of 3 facility snack refrigerators and 2 of 7 sampled residents (#s 29 and 35) reviewed for food and dining. This placed residents at risk for unmet nutritional needs and hunger.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure standard food safety practices were followed for 1 of 1 kitchen and 2 of 2 unit refrigerators. This placed residents at risk for food borne illnesses. 1. On 2/6/23 the documented dinner time for residents began at 4:30 PM. On 2/6/23 at 3:05 PM the kitchen steam table was observed with cooked food on the steam table line including: whole black beans and a container of pureed green food. Three additional unidentified food containers sat in the steam table covered with foil. On 2/6/23 at 4:08 PM Staff 38 (Dietary Aide) stated he was the designated cook for dinner and started to prepare the puree foods around 12:30 PM and placed them on the steam table beginning at 1:00 PM. Staff 38 stated he understood food was not to be on the steam table line earlier than two hours prior to the meal service. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to provide a homelike dining experience for 2 of 2 dining rooms reviewed for dining. This place residents at risk for a lack of homelike dining.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to revise comprehensive care plans for 5 of 10 sampled residents (#s 4, 35, 42, 65 and 81) reviewed for weight loss, pain management and positioning and mobility. This placed residents at risk for unmet needs.
Inspectors wrote1. Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow proper infection control techniques during wound care for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#61) reviewed for pressure ulcers. This placed residents at risk for cross contamination.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure dignity and respect for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#2) reviewed for dignity. This placed residents at risk for lack of dignity and respect.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to assess residents for safe self-administration of medication for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#53) reviewed for unnecessary medications. This placed residents at risk for unsafe medication administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to keep call lights within reach of 3 of 3 sampled residents (#s 3, 28 and 68) reviewed for call lights. This placed residents at risk for not being able to call for assistance.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to notify the physician in a timely manner for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#31) reviewed for medications. This placed residents at risk for unmet needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow physician orders and follow the comprehensive care plan for 2 of 7 sampled residents (#s 61 and 65) reviewed for ROM and nutrition. This placed residents at risk for unmet needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to implement mobility devices to ensure residents maintained ROM for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#41) reviewed for range of motion. This placed residents at risk for a decline in their range of motion and functional abilities.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to accurately assess smoking and ensure residents' environment was free of smoking hazards for 3 of 4 sampled residents (#12, 43 and 53) reviewed for smoking. This placed residents at risk for smoking hazards.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide palatable meals for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#12) reviewed for food. This placed residents at risk for impaired nutrition.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determine the facility failed to address and honor food preferences for 2 of 7 sampled residents (#s 12 and 34) reviewed for food. This placed residents at risk for lack of honored preferences and meal satisfaction.
2 fire safety citations on file: 1 on May 17, 2024, 1 on February 10, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| May 17, 2024 | Fine | $8,824 |
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 | Oregon | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 4.58 | 5.03 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.57 | 0.72 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 4.06 | 4.51 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 3.31 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.70 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 42.7% | 47.4% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 30.8% | 51.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
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 4.79 on weekdays and 4.06 on weekends, 15% 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 5.21 in April to June 2025 to 4.58 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 | 4.58 | 0.57 | 4.79 | 4.06 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 87 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 5.11 | 0.67 | 5.33 | 4.57 | 1.0% | 0 of 92 | 77 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 5.26 | 0.72 | 5.51 | 4.61 | 3.7% | 0 of 92 | 78 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 5.21 | 0.67 | 5.44 | 4.63 | 1.9% | 0 of 91 | 77 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Oregon, Jan to Mar 2026 | 4.91 | 0.64 | 5.12 | 4.40 | 6.2% | 0.4% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oregon, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $23.96 | $22.83 to $28.40 | 14,800 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $38.69 | $35.11 to $43.60 | 4,260 |
| Registered nurses | $62.02 | $51.55 to $64.63 | 39,730 |
| 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 | Oregon | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.0 | 14.9 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.1 | 2.0 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.6 | 2.4 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.8 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 41.6 | 20.6 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 10.3 | 5.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 9.2 | 13.9 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 21.6 | 21.4 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 12.4 | 16.1 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.7 | 1.5 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.2 | 2.4 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Umpqua Valley Nursing & Rehabilitation Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (68.4% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
68.4% this home
Better than the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Oregon: 52 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. 224 eligible stays.
10.2% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Oregon: 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. 221 eligible stays.
6.0% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Oregon: 0 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. 136 eligible stays.
72.9% this home
Median of homes: Oregon59.2% · 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. 96 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Oregon0.0% · 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. 137 residents counted.
1.4% this home
Median of homes: Oregon2.6% · 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. 137 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: Oregon98.5% · 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. 19 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: UMPQUA RIVER NURSING & REHAB LLC. CMS links this home to Volare Health, a group of 16 nursing homes averaging 1.8 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pac 12 Opco Holdco LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 01/01/2023 |
| Knox Healthcare Pac 12 Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 01/01/2023 | |
| Pac 12 Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 01/01/2023 | |
| Pac 12 Pinnacle Holdco LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 01/01/2023 | |
| Hagler, Alexander | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Knox, Donald | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Knox, Donald | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Sparks, Benjamin | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/2023 | |
| Pac 12 Opco Holdco LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 01/01/2023 | |
| Pac 12 Pinnacle Holdco LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 01/01/2023 | |
| Volare Health LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 01/01/2023 | |
| Schwartz, Eliezer | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2023 |
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 Oregon. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.