Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
The next survey window likely opens around November 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of June 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Briarwood At Timber Ridge during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
The facility failed to provide two residents with the required written notices, including appeal rights, at the time of transfer to an acute care hospital. The facility's policy mandated that such notices be given, but records for both residents lacked the necessary documentation. Staff interviews confirmed the omission, revealing that the charge nurses responsible for completing the transfer paperwork did not include the appeal rights in the packets provided to the residents.
The facility failed to monitor residents on anticoagulants for side effects and did not properly manage edema in a resident. Several residents on anticoagulants were not monitored for bleeding, and a resident with edema was not consistently using compression stockings as recommended. Documentation and monitoring were insufficient, leading to potential health risks.
The facility failed to ensure a safe environment by not activating bathroom door chime alarms for two residents with dementia, leaving a maintenance cart with tools and chemicals unsupervised, and not securing storage and kitchen pantry doors. These actions placed residents at risk for accidents and injuries.
The facility failed to implement comprehensive care plans for three residents, leading to unmet care needs. A resident with dementia did not consistently receive prescribed compression stockings. Another resident with a stroke had outdated care plans and inconsistent stocking application. A third resident with a lung infection lacked a care plan for long-term antibiotic use.
The facility failed to follow physician's orders and medication parameters for three residents, leading to medication errors and unclarified duplicate orders. A resident with high blood pressure received medications outside prescribed parameters multiple times, while another had duplicate laxative orders unclarified. Additionally, a resident received a laxative despite having bowel movements documented, contrary to the order. These issues were acknowledged by the DON and MDS Coordinator.
Failure to Provide Required Transfer Notices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents received the required written notices at the time of transfer or discharge, specifically for two residents who were transferred to an acute care hospital. The facility's policy required that a notice of transfer be provided as soon as practicable, including the reason, effective date, location, and an explanation of the resident's rights for transfer. However, for both residents reviewed, the records lacked the reverse side of the Notice of Emergency Transfer form, which contained information on appeal rights. This omission was identified during a review of the residents' records and confirmed by staff interviews. Resident 30 was transferred to an acute care hospital with an anticipated return, but the appeal rights were not documented in their records. Similarly, Resident 43 was transferred under the same circumstances, and their records also lacked the appeal rights documentation. Interviews with the Social Services Director and a Licensed Practical Nurse revealed that the charge nurses were responsible for completing the transfer paperwork, which should have included the appeal rights. However, the required information was missing from the packets provided to the residents upon transfer, as confirmed by the staff during the review.
Inadequate Monitoring of Anticoagulant Use and Edema Management
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that five residents received necessary care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice. Specifically, the facility did not adequately monitor residents taking anticoagulant medications for potential complications such as excessive bruising, bleeding, or bloody urine. Residents 33, 5, 26, and 29 were all on anticoagulant medications, yet there were significant lapses in monitoring for adverse side effects. For instance, Resident 33 experienced frequent nosebleeds and had a history of gastrointestinal bleeding, but monitoring for bleeding was only ordered 13 months after the initial anticoagulant prescription. Similarly, Residents 5, 26, and 29 had no documented instructions for monitoring adverse effects until months after starting their medications. Additionally, the facility failed to properly assess, monitor, and apply compression stockings for Resident 34, who had edema. Despite recommendations for the use of compression stockings to manage swelling in the lower legs, observations showed that Resident 34 was not wearing them. The facility's records lacked consistent documentation of the resident's edema status, and there was no comprehensive care plan addressing the resident's heart failure and related edema treatment. Staff interviews revealed an expectation for regular monitoring and documentation, which was not met. These deficiencies in monitoring and documentation placed residents at risk for delays in treatment and potential declines in health. The facility's policies on anticoagulation and edema management were not followed, leading to inadequate care for the affected residents.
Failure to Maintain Safe Environment and Supervise Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a safe environment free from accident hazards for two residents, identified as Resident 7 and Resident 26, among a sample of 12. The deficiencies included the failure to activate bathroom door chime alarms for these residents, which were intended to alert staff when the residents attempted to use the bathroom without assistance. Observations revealed that the bathroom doors for both residents were left open, and the alarms were not functioning, despite care plans and physician orders requiring their use. Resident 7, who had severe memory impairment and a history of falls, was observed multiple times with the bathroom door open and the alarm disengaged. Similarly, Resident 26, who also had dementia and a history of falls, was observed entering the bathroom without the alarm triggering. Additional hazards were identified in the facility's common areas. A maintenance cart containing tools and chemicals was left unsupervised in a hallway accessible to residents, posing a risk, especially to those with dementia. The cart included a drill and a bottle of drain opening compound. Furthermore, a storage room near the nurse's station was found unlocked, containing supplies and bottles of a liquid medication disposal system with warning labels indicating potential harm if ingested. The kitchen pantry door was also observed propped open without staff present, despite having a keypad lock system. Interviews with staff, including the MDS Coordinator, Director of Nursing, and Administrator, confirmed that these conditions were not in compliance with the facility's safety protocols. Staff acknowledged the risks posed by unsupervised tools and chemicals, as well as the necessity of keeping storage areas and the kitchen pantry secured. The failure to adhere to care plan interventions and safety protocols placed residents at risk for accidents and injuries.
Failure to Implement Comprehensive Care Plans
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive care plans for three residents, leading to unmet care needs. Resident 7, with severe dementia and requiring assistance for dressing, had a care plan directing staff to apply compression stockings daily. However, observations showed inconsistencies in following this directive, with the resident not wearing the stockings as prescribed. Staff interviews confirmed the expectation to adhere to care plan interventions, which was not met in this case. Resident 34, with a history of stroke and on anticoagulant medication, also had a care plan for compression stockings that was not consistently followed. Additionally, an outdated care plan related to COVID-19 was not updated to reflect the resident's current status. Resident 33, with mild cognitive impairment and a lung infection, lacked a care plan addressing their antibiotic treatment, which was determined to be long-term. The absence of specific goals and interventions for this treatment was noted, highlighting a gap in the care planning process.
Medication Administration and Order Clarification Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that physician's orders were followed, medications were administered within ordered parameters, and physician orders were clarified as needed for three residents. Resident 38, who had multiple medically complex diagnoses including high blood pressure, received medications outside of the prescribed parameters on multiple occasions across August, September, and October 2024. Specifically, Medication B was administered outside of the parameters on eight occasions in August, five in September, and nine in October, while Medications A and C were also given outside of parameters on one occasion each in October. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the expectation for staff to adhere to medication parameters as ordered by the provider. Resident 96 had duplicate orders for a laxative suppository to be given as needed for constipation, which were not clarified, as noted by the MDS Coordinator. Additionally, Resident 34 received a liquid laxative on September 6, 2024, despite having two bowel movements documented the previous day, contrary to the order to administer the medication only if no bowel movement occurred in two days. The MDS Coordinator confirmed the expectation for staff to follow orders and administer medications as prescribed. These failures placed residents at risk for medication errors, delayed treatment, and adverse outcomes.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 871 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 3 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Issaquah
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Avamere Rehabilitation Of Issaquah | 1.5 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Marianwood Health And Rehabilitation | 3.3 mi | — | 22 | 0 |
| Covenant Shores Health Center | 7.4 mi | — | 25 | 0 |
| Bellevue Post Acute | 7.5 mi | — | 63 | 0 |
| Renton Health & Rehabilitation | 7.8 mi | — | 28 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Briarwood At Timber Ridge.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 2026) and official state health department websites.