Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
Past the typical resurvey interval — a standard survey could occur at any time
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 Cashmere Post Acute during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
The facility failed to ensure a designated Infection Preventionist (IP) worked at least part-time, with Staff J only dedicating 15% of their time to infection control duties. The Facility Assessment did not specify required IP hours, and Staff B, the DON, confirmed the insufficiency of time allocated for IP duties, placing residents at risk for infectious disease transmission.
The facility failed to develop baseline care plans within 48 hours for three residents, including one with vertebral fractures and another with heart failure. The plans lacked necessary PASARR recommendations and social services goals, and a readmitted resident's previous care plan was not updated promptly. Staff interviews indicated lapses in the timely creation and delivery of these care plans.
The facility failed to properly store and label potentially hazardous food in the kitchen, with numerous items found without use-by dates. Additionally, the concentration of disinfectant solution used for cleaning food preparation areas was below the required range, increasing the risk of cross-contamination. Staff E, the Dietary Department Director, acknowledged these lapses in procedure.
The facility failed to honor the rights of two residents regarding shower frequency and meal preferences. A resident with bipolar disorder was limited to one shower per week despite requesting more, and another resident with diabetes faced meal restrictions contrary to facility policy. The DON confirmed that the correct processes were not followed.
A facility breached a resident's privacy by posting a sign in their room that disclosed their schizophrenia diagnosis and personal preferences. The sign, observed by surveyors, included sensitive health information, which a registered nurse later confirmed should not be displayed in resident rooms.
The facility failed to maintain a sanitary and homelike environment in the shower room, which contained personal items and clutter, including a staff desk with electronic devices and personal drink containers. The resident bathtub area had damaged tiles and a crusty film on the faucet, compromising the comfort and safety of residents during showers. Staff acknowledged the inappropriate presence of food and drink in the shower room.
The facility failed to provide written bed-hold notices to two residents during hospital transfers, as required by policy. One resident experienced multiple hospital transfers without receiving complete or any bed-hold notices, while another resident's representative confirmed not receiving a notice. The DON acknowledged issues with the transition to electronic forms, affecting clarity and acknowledgment of bed-hold agreements.
The facility failed to ensure accurate PASARR assessments for residents with mental health conditions, leading to deficiencies in care. A resident was readmitted with mental health diagnoses, but the PASARR Level I form was incorrect, and no Level II screening was conducted. Two residents with mood disorders were not referred for Level II evaluations, and another resident was admitted without a completed PASARR Level I form. Staff acknowledged these procedural failures.
A facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan for a resident with a heart condition, as required by a physician's order. The resident refused to wear a pulmonary vest and take medication multiple times, but these refusals were not documented, nor was the physician notified. Staff interviews confirmed the resident's autonomy in decision-making, but the care plan was not updated to reflect these refusals, leaving the resident at risk for unmet care needs.
A facility failed to monitor fluid intake for a resident with a fluid restriction order, leading to consistent overages in fluid consumption. Additionally, another resident with mobility and positioning needs was not provided with necessary care, resulting in unsafe eating and mobility conditions. Staff interviews revealed a lack of awareness and procedures for both issues, placing residents at risk for health complications.
A resident with chronic pain conditions experienced inadequate pain management due to the facility's failure to implement an effective program. Despite receiving medications like oxycodone and Tylenol, the resident consistently reported high pain levels. Observations and interviews revealed a lack of clear dosing parameters and follow-up on specialist recommendations, contributing to unmanaged pain. The resident's care plan was outdated and lacked non-pharmacological interventions.
The facility had a medication error rate of 7.69% due to improper insulin administration for two residents. An LPN administered insulin without holding the needle in place for the recommended duration, as per facility policy and FDA guidelines. Both the LPN and the DON demonstrated a misunderstanding of the correct procedure, leading to potential incomplete dosage delivery.
The facility failed to remove expired medications from use and secure medication carts when unsupervised. Expired medications were found in multiple medication carts, and carts were left unlocked and unattended. Additionally, the facility did not follow CDC guidance for vaccine temperature monitoring, recording temperatures only once daily. These issues risked residents receiving expired or compromised medications and vaccines.
The facility failed to implement an effective Infection Control and Prevention Program, with staff not adhering to hand hygiene, equipment sanitation, and PPE protocols. Observations included improper handling of food, unsanitized use of mechanical lifts, and non-compliance with Enhanced Barrier Precautions and Transmission-Based Precautions, increasing the risk of infection transmission.
The facility failed to update the daily nursing staff posting, with observations showing outdated information for four out of five days. Interviews revealed confusion over responsibility for weekend updates, with the Staffing Coordinator and DON acknowledging the need for a better system. The Administrator was informed of the inconsistency and planned to assign the task to a dedicated staff member.
A resident with intact cognition and independent mobility left the facility unsupervised, and the investigation was incomplete, lacking witness statements and documentation of notifications. No interventions were formulated to prevent further elopement, and the care plan was not updated. The resident went missing again the next day and discharged against medical advice.
The facility failed to assess and implement interventions for residents with substance use disorder (SUD) and elopement risks. A resident with a PICC line and high elopement risk was allowed unsupervised access outside the facility, leading to multiple elopements. Two other residents with SUD were also at risk for elopement, but their care plans lacked necessary interventions. Staff interviews revealed a lack of training in managing SUD, contributing to inadequate care planning and delayed responses to elopement incidents.
A facility failed to inform a resident and their representative of an increase in monthly financial responsibility before charging the updated amount to the debit card on file. The Business Office Manager altered the Credit Card Authorization Form without agreement, and attempts to notify the representative were unsuccessful. Both the former and current administrators acknowledged the facility's responsibility to notify residents and representatives of billing changes.
Inadequate Infection Preventionist Time Allocation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to designate a qualified Infection Preventionist (IP) who worked at least part-time and was responsible for the Infection Control and Prevention Program (IPCP). This deficiency was identified through interviews and record reviews, which revealed that the current IP, Staff J, only devoted approximately 15% of their working hours to infection control duties. The remaining time was spent on responsibilities as a Resident Care Manager. The facility's policy required the IP to be employed on-site at least part-time, with enough time allocated to assess, develop, implement, monitor, and manage the IPCP, as well as address training requirements and participate in required committees such as Quality Improvement and Performance Improvement (QAPI). The Facility Assessment (FA) dated 09/20/2024, indicated the need for an IP to develop and regularly update infection control protocols, ensure personal protective equipment availability, and manage vaccination availability. However, the FA did not specify the number of IP hours per week required to meet the needs of residents and staff. During an interview, Staff B, the Director of Nursing, confirmed that they did not perform any IP duties and acknowledged that the 15% of time Staff J devoted to IP duties was insufficient to cover the facility's needs. This lack of adequate time and resources for infection prevention placed residents at risk for the transmission of infectious diseases and unmet care needs.
Failure to Develop Timely Baseline Care Plans for New Admissions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop a baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission for three residents, which is a requirement to ensure continuity and resident-centered care. Resident 48 was admitted with conditions such as vertebral fractures, kidney and respiratory failure, and muscle weakness, requiring maximum assistance for ADLs. However, the baseline care plan was not documented until five days after admission, missing PASARR recommendations and behavioral health goals. Similarly, Resident 196, admitted with heart failure and adult failure to thrive, did not have a baseline care plan with PASARR recommendations or social services goals until four days post-admission. Resident 9, who was a readmission, had their previous care plan automatically pulled into their new admission record, which was not updated until five days after their current admission. This oversight was due to the previous care plan not being closed out in the electronic medical record upon their prior discharge. Staff interviews revealed that the responsibility for creating and delivering the baseline care plans was assigned to specific staff members, but the process was not completed within the required timeframe, leading to the deficiency.
Improper Food Storage and Disinfectant Use in Kitchen
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly store and label potentially hazardous food (PHF) and dry goods in the kitchen, as observed during a survey. Items in the refrigerator, such as green beans, peas, chicken noodle soup, shredded American cheese, carrots, thickened cranberry juice, health shake, and whipped topping bags, were found without use-by dates. Similarly, items in Freezer #1, Freezer #2, and Freezer #3, including ground beef, diced ham, battered fish, biscuits, garlic bread, various soups, chicken breast, pork sausage patties, beef hot dogs, chili, beef steaks, ham, and cinnamon rolls, were also unlabeled and lacked open or use-by dates. Staff E, the Dietary Department Director, acknowledged that the process for labeling and dating food items was not being followed, which is contrary to the facility's policy and the Washington State Retail Food Code. Additionally, the facility failed to maintain the proper concentration of disinfectant solution used for cleaning food preparation areas, which is crucial to prevent cross-contamination. During an observation, Staff E tested a bucket of Disinfect Multi-Quat 146 solution and found it had a concentration of 100 parts per million (PPM), which is below the required range of 150 to 400 PPM. Staff E admitted there was no process for testing the solution in the disinfectant buckets, and they were changed approximately every four hours. This failure to maintain the correct concentration of disinfectant solution further increased the risk of cross-contamination in the kitchen.
Failure to Honor Resident Choices in Showers and Meals
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to honor the residents' rights to self-determination and choice, specifically regarding the frequency of showers and meal preferences. Resident 87, who has diagnoses including bipolar disorder and personality disorder, was only scheduled for one shower per week despite expressing a desire for at least two showers weekly. The resident had communicated this preference to the staff, but the request was not accommodated. The Director of Nursing acknowledged that the process for accommodating such requests was not followed. Resident 22, who has diabetes mellitus, heart failure, and liver disease, reported limitations on the amount of food they could have at meals, which was contrary to the facility's stated process. The resident expressed dissatisfaction with the meal restrictions, noting that if they were still hungry after a meal, they could not receive additional food. The Director of Nursing confirmed that it was not the facility's process to limit food and that residents should be allowed additional meals if requested.
Violation of Resident Privacy Due to Posted Medical Information
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain the confidentiality of a resident's medical condition by posting a sign in the resident's room that disclosed private health information. The sign, observed on January 6, 2025, was laminated and displayed in bold black lettering above the bed of a resident diagnosed with schizophrenia. It included details about the resident's mental health condition, stating, 'I have schizophrenia, I come in and out of reality (not from drugs),' along with other personal preferences and needs. This action violated the resident's right to privacy regarding their medical condition. A registered nurse confirmed during an interview on January 9, 2025, that such signs should not be displayed in resident rooms as they contain private personal health history information.
Unsanitary and Cluttered Shower Room Environment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a sanitary and homelike environment in the shower room, which was observed to contain various personal items and clutter. During an observation and interview, it was noted that the shower room had a staff desk with a laptop, computer tablet, and a clipboard of resident names, along with personal items such as a large pink jug, a black shaker cup, and a pink cell phone. The shower area also contained a large pink drink tumbler and a Dutch Bro's cup with a brown and white liquid. Additionally, the resident bathtub area had a chair with torn fabric, bulging tiles, and broken tiles with sharp edges, as well as a white, crusty film on the faucet handles and spout. Staff G, a Nursing Assistant, was observed using the personal items in the shower room, and Staff B, the Director of Nursing, acknowledged that food and drink should not be present in the shower room. Staff B also stated that the desk was intended for nursing assistants to document, but they could use the nursing station instead. The presence of these items and the condition of the shower room did not provide a comfortable and homelike experience for residents during showers, as required by the facility's policy on resident rights.
Failure to Provide Bed-Hold Notices During Hospital Transfers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to issue a written notice of bed hold to residents or their representatives at the time of hospital transfer, as required by their policy. This deficiency was identified for two residents, Resident 27 and Resident 58, who were transferred to the hospital for evaluation due to various health issues. The facility's policy mandates providing written information about the duration of the bed hold, reserve bed payment, and policies regarding bed-hold periods before transferring a resident to the hospital. However, the records for Resident 27 showed that during multiple hospital transfers, either the bed-hold notice was incomplete or not provided at all. Similarly, for Resident 58, there was no documentation of a bed-hold notice being issued during their hospital transfer. Interviews conducted with Resident 58's representative and the Director of Nursing (DON) revealed further insights into the deficiency. Resident 58's representative confirmed that they were not provided with a bed-hold notice during the resident's hospital stay. The DON acknowledged that while bed holds were offered upon admission, the transition from paper to electronic forms had led to issues with clarity and acknowledgment of the bed-hold agreement by residents or their representatives. This oversight placed residents at risk of not being informed about their rights and potential charges associated with bed holds during hospital stays.
Deficiencies in PASARR Assessments for Residents with Mental Health Conditions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure accurate Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) assessments for residents with mental health conditions, leading to deficiencies in the care provided. Resident 51 was readmitted with multiple mental health diagnoses, including bipolar disorder and adjustment disorder, but the PASARR Level I form incorrectly indicated no serious mental illness, and no Level II screening was conducted. Staff D acknowledged the oversight, noting that a new PASARR Level I was not completed upon the resident's return from the hospital. Resident 55, admitted with major depressive disorder and experiencing delusions, was identified in the PASARR Level I assessment as having a mood disorder. However, a Level II evaluation was not conducted, contrary to the requirements. Similarly, Resident 84, with diagnoses of schizophrenia and major depressive disorder, was also not referred for a Level II evaluation despite being identified with a schizophrenic and mood disorder in the PASARR Level I assessment. Staff D admitted to not following the correct process for these residents. Additionally, Resident 9 was admitted without a completed PASARR Level I form, as required. Staff E and Staff F were unable to locate the form in the medical record, indicating a lapse in the admission process. The facility's administrator, Staff A, confirmed the necessity for timely and accurate PASARR screenings upon admission, highlighting the procedural failures in the facility's handling of PASARR assessments.
Failure to Implement Comprehensive Care Plan for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive care plans for Resident 27, who had complex medical diagnoses including a heart condition that could lead to fluid in the lungs. Despite a physician's order from November 2024 directing staff to assist the resident with wearing a pulmonary vest and documenting any refusals, the facility did not create a care plan addressing the use of the pulmonary vest or the resident's refusal of care. The resident's medical record showed numerous refusals of the pulmonary vest and medication, yet there was no documentation of these refusals, no risk and benefits assessment, and no notification to the physician. Interviews with staff revealed that Resident 27 had worn the pulmonary vest initially but had since stopped, and staff did not document the refusals or update the care plan accordingly. The Director of Nursing acknowledged that refusals should be part of the care plan to meet the resident's needs. The lack of a comprehensive care plan and failure to document refusals left the resident at risk for unmet care needs and other negative health outcomes.
Deficiencies in Fluid Monitoring and Positioning Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement a process for monitoring daily fluid intake for a resident with a physician's order for fluid restriction. Resident 196, who was admitted with diagnoses including biventricular heart failure and generalized edema, had a physician's order for a 2000 mL fluid restriction per day. However, observations and interviews revealed that the nursing staff did not accurately monitor or record the resident's fluid intake. The medication administration record showed consistent overages in fluid intake, with daily totals significantly exceeding the prescribed limits. Staff interviews indicated a lack of awareness and proper procedures for tracking fluid intake, leading to the resident receiving more fluids than allowed. Additionally, the facility failed to provide necessary care and services for Resident 4, who required assistance with positioning during meals and wheelchair use. Resident 4, diagnosed with conditions such as osteoporosis and spastic hemiplegia, was observed in a hunched position in their wheelchair, which affected their ability to eat and move safely. The care plan lacked interventions for proper positioning, and staff interviews confirmed that no assessments or instructions were provided for Resident 4's positioning needs. Observations showed that Resident 4 struggled with eating and mobility due to their positioning, leading to concerns about their safety and well-being. The deficiencies in monitoring fluid intake and providing appropriate positioning care placed both residents at risk for health complications and poor clinical outcomes. The facility's failure to implement effective processes and provide necessary care highlights significant gaps in the quality of care provided to these residents.
Inadequate Pain Management for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and implement an effective pain management program for a resident, identified as Resident 51, who was reviewed for pain management. The resident was admitted with multiple diagnoses, including neck pain, chronic pain syndrome, lumbar stenosis with neurogenic claudication, and osteoarthritis of the knee. Despite receiving scheduled pain medication, PRN medications, and non-medication interventions, the resident consistently reported high pain levels, indicating that their pain was not adequately managed. Observations and interviews revealed that Resident 51 experienced significant pain in their knees, hip, and back, and expressed feelings of not being believed about their pain. The resident was receiving oxycodone and Tylenol for pain management, but continued to rate their pain at a high level on the pain scale. The facility's pain assessments indicated that the resident's pain appeared to be fairly well controlled, despite the resident's verbal and non-verbal expressions of pain. Additionally, the resident had not been evaluated by relevant specialists for over two years, and there was a lack of follow-up on recommended treatments such as steroid injections. Interviews with facility staff highlighted inconsistencies in the administration of pain medication, with no clear parameters for dosing based on pain levels. Staff members acknowledged the need for a process to ensure appropriate medication administration and conversion of PRN medications to scheduled medications. The resident's care plan had not been updated for over two years and did not include non-pharmacological interventions for pain management. The lack of clear guidelines and follow-up on specialist recommendations contributed to the deficiency in providing effective pain management for the resident.
Medication Administration Errors in Insulin Delivery
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than five percent, resulting in a rate of 7.69% during a survey. This was identified through observations of medication administration for two residents, Resident 8 and Resident 345, out of 26 opportunities. Resident 8, who had diabetes and a history of stroke, was observed receiving 12 units of insulin, but the needle was only held in place for two seconds instead of the recommended six to ten seconds. This improper technique could lead to incomplete dosage delivery. Similarly, Resident 345, who also had diabetes, was administered seven units of insulin with the needle held for only three seconds, contrary to the facility's policy and FDA guidelines. The observations revealed that Staff C, an LPN, did not adhere to the correct procedure for insulin administration, as confirmed by their statement that holding the needle for a second or two was sufficient. This was further corroborated by the Director of Nursing, who also indicated a misunderstanding of the correct procedure. The facility's failure to ensure proper insulin administration practices contributed to the medication errors, potentially affecting the therapeutic outcomes for the residents involved.
Expired Medications and Unsecured Carts Found in Facility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure expired medications were removed from use and that medication carts were secured when unsupervised. During observations, expired medications were found in the South and North Hall medication carts, including Nystatin powder and cream, Ketoconazole cream, Ciclopirox cream, GI Cocktail, Nitroglycerin, Flonase Spray, Albuterol inhalers, wound gel, Ondansetron, and Chlorhexidine Gluconate. Additionally, the East Hall medication cart was left unlocked and unattended by a registered nurse on two occasions, and the wound treatment cart, which contained vaccines and other medications, was also left unsecured. The wound treatment cart lacked a locking mechanism, and staff were observed walking away from it while it contained medications. The facility also failed to adhere to CDC guidance for temperature monitoring of vaccines stored in the medication refrigerator. The refrigerator, which contained RSV and influenza vaccines, had its temperature recorded only once a day, contrary to CDC recommendations of using a digital data logger or recording temperatures at least twice daily. The Director of Nursing was unaware of the requirement for more frequent temperature monitoring. These deficiencies placed residents at risk of receiving expired or compromised medications and vaccines, as well as unauthorized access to potentially harmful medications.
Inadequate Infection Control and Prevention Program
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement an effective Infection Control and Prevention Program (IPCP), as evidenced by multiple observations of staff not adhering to established infection prevention measures. Staff Q was observed during dining service handling food and soiled items without performing hand hygiene, which is a critical step in preventing the spread of infection. This lack of hand hygiene was contrary to CDC guidelines, which emphasize the importance of cleaning hands before and after patient contact and after contact with potentially contaminated surfaces. Additionally, the facility did not ensure proper cleaning of equipment, as observed with the use of mechanical lifts by multiple staff members (Staff W, Y, S, V, T, U, AA, and BB). These lifts were used for resident transfers without being sanitized between uses, increasing the risk of cross-contamination. The mechanical lifts were stored in a soiled utility room, which was not an appropriate storage area for clean equipment, as it contained soiled items and standing water, further compromising infection control practices. The facility also failed to adhere to Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) and Transmission-Based Precautions (TBP). Staff members were observed not wearing the required personal protective equipment (PPE) such as gowns and gloves during high-contact resident care and while in isolation rooms. This non-compliance with PPE protocols was observed during wound care, catheter management, and other resident interactions, which are critical moments for preventing the spread of multidrug-resistant organisms and other infections. Furthermore, food service practices were inadequate, with meal carts containing uncovered food items being left unattended, increasing the risk of foodborne illnesses.
Failure to Update Daily Nursing Staff Posting
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the nursing staff posting was updated daily to reflect the actual nursing staff hours worked during four out of five days of the survey period. Observations on multiple days showed that the nursing staff posting, located across from the nurses' station, was outdated and did not display the current day's staffing information. Specifically, on January 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th, the posting was dated January 3rd, and on January 10th, it was dated January 9th, failing to show the actual nursing staff hours for those days. Interviews with facility staff revealed a lack of clarity and communication regarding the responsibility for updating the nursing staff postings, particularly over the weekends. Staff H, the Staffing Coordinator, mentioned that the postings were prepared in advance and left for the nursing staff to display over the weekend, but acknowledged the need to revisit this process. Staff B, the Director of Nursing, admitted the necessity for a better system, and Staff A, the Administrator, was made aware of the inconsistency and planned to assign the task to a dedicated staff member. This deficiency prevented residents, family members, and visitors from knowing the facility's actual number of available nursing staff.
Failure to Investigate Resident Elopement
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to thoroughly investigate an incident involving a missing resident, identified as Resident 1, who was reviewed for elopement. Resident 1, who had an intact cognition and was independent in transfers and walking, left the facility unsupervised and without staff knowledge. The investigation into the incident was incomplete, lacking witness statements, a timeline of events, and documentation of notifications to the provider, local law enforcement, or the resident's representative. Additionally, there were no interventions formulated to prevent further elopement, and the resident's care plan was not updated to reflect the risk or actual elopement. Staff interviews revealed that key personnel were out of town during the incident, and those present did not conduct interviews with staff or other residents to determine how Resident 1 left unnoticed. Notifications to the resident's representative and law enforcement were made but not documented. A verbal agreement was made with Resident 1 not to leave the facility again without notifying staff, but this was not documented in the care plan. The following day, Resident 1 went missing again and was later found at a bus stop, after which they discharged from the facility against medical advice. The second elopement was not treated as such, and no investigation was conducted.
Failure to Address Elopement Risks and SUD in Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents with substance use disorder (SUD) received appropriate assessments and interventions, particularly concerning the risk of elopement. Three residents were identified as having SUD and were at risk for elopement, yet their care plans did not reflect necessary interventions or increased supervision. Resident 1, who had a history of drug use and was previously homeless, was assessed as high risk for elopement but was allowed to leave the facility unsupervised, even with a PICC line in place. The care plan for Resident 1 lacked coping strategies and did not address the elopement risk or the potential misuse of the PICC line. Resident 2, who was assessed as a moderate risk for elopement, was observed attempting to leave the facility without proper supervision or intervention. Their care plan also failed to include coping strategies or specific interventions for their alcohol/drug dependency and elopement risk. Similarly, Resident 3, also assessed as a moderate risk for elopement, had no care plan addressing their SUD or elopement risk. The facility's policies on elopement and SUD were not effectively implemented, as evidenced by the lack of staff training and the absence of appropriate care planning. Interviews with staff revealed a lack of training and awareness regarding the management of residents with SUD. Staff E, responsible for formulating care plans, admitted to not assessing residents for SUD due to a lack of training. The facility's response to Resident 1's elopement incidents was delayed, with notifications to law enforcement and the resident's representative occurring hours after the resident was last seen. The facility's failure to implement timely and effective interventions for residents with SUD and elopement risks placed these residents at risk for preventable accidents.
Failure to Notify Resident of Increased Financial Responsibility
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to inform a resident and their representative of an increase in their monthly financial responsibility before charging the updated amount to the debit card on file. The resident, who was admitted with diagnoses including a left hip fracture, osteoporosis, and severe obesity, had intact cognition and required assistance for mobility and personal care. The admission agreement stipulated that residents would be notified of any rate changes at least 30 days in advance. However, the facility received notification from a State Agency about the change in the resident's care cost participation amount, but did not inform the resident or their representative before charging the increased amount. The Business Office Manager admitted to altering the Credit Card Authorization Form using correcting tape to reflect the new amount without obtaining agreement from the resident or their representative. Attempts to notify the representative via phone were unsuccessful, and no written notification was provided. The former and current administrators acknowledged the facility's responsibility to notify residents and representatives of billing changes and stated that a new authorization form should have been obtained. The failure to properly notify and obtain agreement for the increased charge was identified as a deficiency.
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 3 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — 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 Cashmere
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regency Wenatchee Rehabiliation & Nursing Center | 10.3 mi | — | 3 | 0 |
| Colonial Vista Post-acute & Rehab Center | 10.6 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Mountain View Post Acute | 36.9 mi | — | 35 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Cashmere Post Acute.
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.