Every person who worked here at any point in the quarter, employees and contractors. It is not how many are on site at once: that is the "on an average day" figure.
166
163 employees · 3 contractors · 54 on an average day Avamere at Pacific Ridge
Nursing Home, Memory Care & Skilled Nursing · Tacoma, WA
ALM Inspection Grade
C
ALM's inspection grade is 73 / 100, a C — 11 points below the Washington average for CMS-certified facilities (84/100) · A proprietary Assisted Living Magazine grade.A 0–100 score of a facility's regulatory inspection record, shown as a letter and compared with other facilities of the same kind in the same state. It is not a government rating.
ALM's inspection grade is 73 / 100, a C — 11 points below the Washington average for CMS-certified facilities (84/100) · A proprietary Assisted Living Magazine grade.A 0–100 score of a facility's regulatory inspection record, shown as a letter and compared with other facilities of the same kind in the same state. It is not a government rating.
CMS overall rating
2/5
CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) is the federal agency that rates nursing home quality. Its Overall Rating runs from 1 to 5 stars, combining health inspections, staffing, and quality measures, with inspections weighted most heavily.
2/5
CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) is the federal agency that rates nursing home quality. Its Overall Rating runs from 1 to 5 stars, combining health inspections, staffing, and quality measures, with inspections weighted most heavily.
Avamere at Pacific Ridge
Nursing Home, Memory Care & Skilled Nursing · Tacoma, WA
ALM Inspection Grade
C
ALM's inspection grade is 73 / 100, a C — 11 points below the Washington average for CMS-certified facilities (84/100) · A proprietary Assisted Living Magazine grade.A 0–100 score of a facility's regulatory inspection record, shown as a letter and compared with other facilities of the same kind in the same state. It is not a government rating.
ALM's inspection grade is 73 / 100, a C — 11 points below the Washington average for CMS-certified facilities (84/100) · A proprietary Assisted Living Magazine grade.A 0–100 score of a facility's regulatory inspection record, shown as a letter and compared with other facilities of the same kind in the same state. It is not a government rating.
CMS overall rating
2/5
CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) is the federal agency that rates nursing home quality. Its Overall Rating runs from 1 to 5 stars, combining health inspections, staffing, and quality measures, with inspections weighted most heavily.
2/5
CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) is the federal agency that rates nursing home quality. Its Overall Rating runs from 1 to 5 stars, combining health inspections, staffing, and quality measures, with inspections weighted most heavily.
Avamere at Pacific Ridge accepts Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay.
Avamere at Pacific Ridge is a nursing home and memory care community in Tacoma, Washington. Its skilled nursing services provide licensed nursing care on site. Memory care offers supervision in a secured setting for residents living with dementia or cognitive impairment. The community may be a good fit for someone whose behavioral or mental health needs are addressed through its Behavioral & Mental Health program.
The home has 102 beds, with total nurse staffing of 5 hours and 12 minutes per resident each day. That figure represents the daily hands-on nursing time allocated to each resident. Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay are accepted, with Medicare applying to short-term skilled care after a hospital stay, Medicaid potentially helping when savings do not cover a long stay, and private pay allowing payment from personal funds.
An on-site therapy gym and rehabilitation services let residents receive therapy without arranging transportation to an outside gym. Telemedicine assistance supports medical visits by video, while transportation assistance helps with travel needs that cannot be met on foot. The area has a Walk Score of 56, making it somewhat walkable, with some errands possible on foot. A resident who no longer drives may be able to reach select nearby destinations independently.
Quality ratings
The Overall CMS Rating combines results from health inspections, staffing levels and quality measures. Health inspections carry the most weight. Staffing and quality scores can increase or decrease the final rating based on performance compared to state and national standards.
Based on the results of the facility's three most recent standard inspections and any complaint investigations. CMS reviews the number, scope, and severity of deficiencies, with more recent findings weighted more heavily.
Measures average nursing staff hours per resident per day, including Registered Nurses (RNs) and total nursing staff. Ratings are adjusted based on the level of care residents require and are compared to state and national benchmarks.
Based on clinical and physical health indicators reported to CMS, such as hospital readmissions, falls, pressure ulcers, and improvements in mobility. These measures reflect how well residents' health needs are being managed.
Staffing
Data period: Q4 2025 (October 1 – December 31, 2025).
Nursing care per resident per day and state rankings: CMS Provider Information.
Headcount, shifts and contractors: CMS Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ).
Resident count: CMS Long-Term Care Facility Characteristics (data as of Jun 2026).
Total nursing care per resident / day
This nursing home is ranked 3rd out of 60 nursing homes we track in Washington for nurse hours. Total adjusted nursing hours per resident per day, combining RN, LPN, and aide time. CMS adjusts this for case-mix so facilities can be fairly compared.
5h 12m
This nursing home is ranked 3rd out of 60 nursing homes we track in Washington for nurse hours. Total adjusted nursing hours per resident per day, combining RN, LPN, and aide time. CMS adjusts this for case-mix so facilities can be fairly compared.
5h 12mStandout metric: Certified nursing assistant is +31% above Washington average
3 of 6 metrics below Washington average
Daily care time per resident, by role
Registered nurse (RN)
RNs hold the highest nursing license and can assess residents, interpret test results, and direct care plans. More RN hours per day often signals stronger clinical oversight and faster response to health changes. All 9 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
9 staff · 8.9-hour shifts
47m
↓ 12% · WA 53mThis facility: 47m per resident per day, 12% below the Washington average of 53m (among Washington facilities reporting a recent figure).
RNs hold the highest nursing license and can assess residents, interpret test results, and direct care plans. More RN hours per day often signals stronger clinical oversight and faster response to health changes. All 9 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
9 staff · 8.9-hour shiftsUS average: 41m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 41m
LPN / LVN
Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) or Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVNs) deliver routine hands-on care — medication administration, wound dressing, and monitoring vital signs. They work under RN supervision and make up a large share of daily bedside care. All 19 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
19 staff · 9.6-hour shifts
53m
↑ 9% · WA 49mThis facility: 53m per resident per day, 9% above the Washington average of 49m (among Washington facilities reporting a recent figure).
Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) or Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVNs) deliver routine hands-on care — medication administration, wound dressing, and monitoring vital signs. They work under RN supervision and make up a large share of daily bedside care. All 19 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
19 staff · 9.6-hour shiftsUS average: 52m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 52m
Certified nursing assistant
Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) provide the most direct day-to-day assistance: bathing, dressing, feeding, and mobility. Nurse aide hours are typically the largest staffing category and directly affect residents' quality of life. All 76 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
76 staff · 7.4-hour shifts
3h 32m
↑ 31% · WA 2h 41mThis facility: 3h 32m per resident per day, 31% above the Washington average of 2h 41m (among Washington facilities reporting a recent figure).
Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) provide the most direct day-to-day assistance: bathing, dressing, feeding, and mobility. Nurse aide hours are typically the largest staffing category and directly affect residents' quality of life. All 76 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
76 staff · 7.4-hour shiftsUS average: 2h 21m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 2h 21m
Physical therapist
Hours per resident per day provided by licensed Physical Therapists (PTs) or PT Assistants. PT services help residents recover mobility after injury or illness and are especially important for post-acute (short-stay) rehabilitation.
2m
↓ 56% · WA 5mThis facility: 2m per resident per day, 56% below the Washington average of 5m (among Washington facilities reporting a recent figure).
Hours per resident per day provided by licensed Physical Therapists (PTs) or PT Assistants. PT services help residents recover mobility after injury or illness and are especially important for post-acute (short-stay) rehabilitation.
US average: 4m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 4m
Total nursing, weekends
Combined nursing hours (RN + LPN + Nurse Aide) per resident per day on weekends. Staffing often drops on weekends — this figure reveals whether the facility maintains adequate coverage outside of weekday hours.
RN + LPN + aide · Sat–Sun
4h 36m
↑ 22% · WA 3h 47mThis facility: 4h 36m per resident per day, 22% above the Washington average of 3h 47m (among Washington facilities reporting a recent figure).
Combined nursing hours (RN + LPN + Nurse Aide) per resident per day on weekends. Staffing often drops on weekends — this figure reveals whether the facility maintains adequate coverage outside of weekday hours.
RN + LPN + aide · Sat–SunUS average: 3h 26m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 3h 26m
RN, weekends
Registered nurse hours specifically on weekends. Facilities sometimes reduce RN presence on Saturdays and Sundays — a low weekend RN figure compared to weekday hours can indicate reduced clinical oversight when most administrative staff are absent.
Sat–Sun
38m
↓ 1% · WA 38mThis facility: 38m per resident per day, 1% below the Washington average of 38m (among Washington facilities reporting a recent figure).
Registered nurse hours specifically on weekends. Facilities sometimes reduce RN presence on Saturdays and Sundays — a low weekend RN figure compared to weekday hours can indicate reduced clinical oversight when most administrative staff are absent.
Sat–SunUS average: 29m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 29m
Headcount
Every person who worked here at any point in the quarter, employees and contractors. It is not how many are on site at once: that is the "on an average day" figure.
166
163 employees · 3 contractors · 54 on an average day
166 total staff / 67 residents. Residents: CMS Long-Term Care Facility Characteristics (data as of Jun 2026); staff: CMS Payroll-Based Journal (Q4 2025).Residents and staff come from two different CMS releases, so the two counts can be a few months apart.
2.48 : 1
↑ 38% · WA 1.80This facility: 2.48 staff per resident, 38% above the Washington average of 1.80 (among Washington facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
166 staff ÷ 67 residents
See full Washington ranking →
Average hours one staff member works on a day they are on shift, across every role.
7.7 h
↓ 4% · WA 8 hThis facility: 7.7 h, 4% below the Washington average of 8 h (among Washington facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
38,063 staff hours this quarter
See full Washington ranking →99.8% of staff hours were worked by the facility's own employees
Washington average: 93.8% · Contractors this quarter: Occupational Therapy Assistant (2), Medical Director (1)
Why it matters: employees work here week after week and get to know each resident's routines and needs. Agency contractors often rotate between facilities, so a higher employee share usually means more consistent care.
By The Numbers
Community insights.
Bed count
A mid-sized community that may balance personal attention with shared amenities and social activities.
102
Rank #24 / 69Bed count — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 24th out of 69 nursing homes we track in Washington for bed count. Shows this facility's certified or reported bed count compared to other Washington facilities. Larger communities may offer more amenities, programs, and on-site services for residents and families. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Washington that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
A mid-sized community that may balance personal attention with shared amenities and social activities.
102
Rank #24 / 69Bed count — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 24th out of 69 nursing homes we track in Washington for bed count. Shows this facility's certified or reported bed count compared to other Washington facilities. Larger communities may offer more amenities, programs, and on-site services for residents and families. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Washington that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.Medium-capacity home · Offers a balance of services and community atmosphere.
Walk Score
Somewhat walkable. Some errands can be accomplished on foot, with a mix of nearby amenities.
Rank #33 / 80Walk Score — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 33rd out of 80 nursing homes we track in Washington for walk score. Shows how walkable this facility's neighborhood is compared to the average walk score across Washington facilities. Higher scores benefit residents, families, and staff. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Washington that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
Somewhat walkable. Some errands can be accomplished on foot, with a mix of nearby amenities.
Rank #33 / 80Walk Score — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 33rd out of 80 nursing homes we track in Washington for walk score. Shows how walkable this facility's neighborhood is compared to the average walk score across Washington facilities. Higher scores benefit residents, families, and staff. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Washington that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
56
/ 100
Occupancy rate
Occupancy lower than 85% suggests more openings may be available.
Rank #48 / 56Occupancy rate — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 48th out of 56 nursing homes we track in Washington for occupancy. Shows this facility's occupancy rate versus the Washington average, with its Statewide rank out of 56. Higher occupancy signals strong local demand and financial stability. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Washington that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
Occupancy lower than 85% suggests more openings may be available.
Rank #48 / 56Occupancy rate — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 48th out of 56 nursing homes we track in Washington for occupancy. Shows this facility's occupancy rate versus the Washington average, with its Statewide rank out of 56. Higher occupancy signals strong local demand and financial stability. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Washington that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
65.7%
This home usually has availability
Based on residents per day and 102 beds.
Lower than the Washington average: 77.6%
Residents per day (avg)
The average number of residents living at this facility on a given day. CMS calculates this figure from the facility's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments and uses this value for other measures like Hours Per Resident Per Day (HPRD) and 5-Star Staffing rating.
The average number of residents living at this facility on a given day. CMS calculates this figure from the facility's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments and uses this value for other measures like Hours Per Resident Per Day (HPRD) and 5-Star Staffing rating.
67
Source: CMS Provider Information, average daily residents
Avg. Length of Stay
Average number of days residents stay at this facility, based on CMS cost report data. Shorter stays often reflect post-acute or rehab care; longer stays reflect long-term care.
Average number of days residents stay at this facility, based on CMS cost report data. Shorter stays often reflect post-acute or rehab care; longer stays reflect long-term care.
75
days
About This Community
Bronze Commitment to Quality Award from the American Health Care Association
Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement award from the Centers for Medicaid Services.
AHCA quality care recognition — American Health Care AssociationA specialty credential or certification held by the community or its staff, indicating training or standards beyond basic state licensure.
Resident Council
Family Council
Personal Wheelchair Assessment
Mental Health Practitioners On Staff
Telemedicine
Infection Control
Behavioral and Mental Health
Behavioral Support
Respite CareRespite care provides families and unpaid caregivers with short-term relief from caregiving duties. Care can range from a few hours to a few weeks.
Discharge Planning
In-Room Meal Service
TransportationListed as: Private transportation services
Beauty Salon
Courtyard
Tv and Wifi
Emergency Call System
Activities
Excursions
Pastoral Services
CMS Health Inspection History
ALM Inspection Grade
73 / 100
Calculated from CMS inspection data for this community's nursing-home beds
How it compares
11 points below the Washington average for CMS-certified facilities (84/100)
Category breakdown
Citations
Concern
186 severity-weighted points (69 deficiencies) · 52% higher than the typical CMS-certified WA facility (median: 123)
Enforcement
Concern
3 enforcement actions · 3× more than the typical CMS-certified WA facility (median: 1) · $57,783 in fines
Persistence
Typical
39 days to fix issues · slower than the typical CMS-certified WA facility (median: 37)
Total health inspections
10
↑ 15% · WA 8.7This facility: 10, 15% above the Washington average of 8.7 (among Washington facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Total health citations
69
Rank #49 / 61Health citations — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 49th out of 61 nursing homes we track in Washington for health citations. Shows this facility's total health deficiency citations benchmarked to the Washington State average, with a ranking across all 61 WA facilities. Lower citation counts earn a better rank. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Washington that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.↑ 39% · WA 49.6This facility: 69, 39% above the Washington average of 49.6 (among Washington facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Citations per inspection
6.9
Rank #39 / 61Citations per inspection — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 39th out of 61 nursing homes we track in Washington for citations per inspection. Shows average deficiency citations per CMS inspection for this facility versus the Washington mean across 61 facilities with citation data. Lower is better. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Washington that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.↑ 12% · WA 6.18This facility: 6.9, 12% above the Washington average of 6.18 (among Washington facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Citation severity
100% corrected
69 of 69 citations corrected
Critical
J–L
0
↓ 100% · WA 0.3This facility: 0, 100% below the Washington average of 0.3 (among Washington facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Immediate jeopardy
Serious
G–I
4
↑ 122% · WA 1.8This facility: 4, 122% above the Washington average of 1.8 (among Washington facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Actual harm
Moderate
D–F
63
↑ 34% · WA 47.1This facility: 63, 34% above the Washington average of 47.1 (among Washington facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
No harm, more than minimal risk
Minor
A–C
2
↑ 300% · WA 0.5This facility: 2, 300% above the Washington average of 0.5 (among Washington facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
No harm, minimal riskLatest inspection: Apr 24, 2026 · 21 citations, all corrected
Most cited category: Quality of Life & Care, 23 of 69 citations · 9 categories in total
Citations history
Most recent first
Apr 24, 2026
21 citations
Abuse/Neglect moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Abuse/Neglect moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Abuse/Neglect moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Pharmacy moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Pharmacy moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Apr 23, 2026
1 citation
Pharmacy serious citation
Corrected
Corrected
Dec 12, 2025
1 citation
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
May 20, 2025
1 citation
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Mar 27, 2025
26 citations
Abuse/Neglect moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Nursing Services moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Nutrition moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Nutrition moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Pharmacy moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Pharmacy moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Pharmacy moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Showing the 50 most recent of 69 citations.
Top deficiency categories
Share of 69 citations
Quality of Life & Care
23 deficiencies (33%)
Resident Rights
13 deficiencies (19%)
Resident Assessment & Care Planning
10 deficiencies (14%)
Pharmacy Services
10 deficiencies (14%)
Infection Control
5 deficiencies (7%)
Abuse, Neglect & Exploitation
4 deficiencies (6%)
Nutrition & Dietary
2 deficiencies (3%)
Nursing & Physician Services
1 deficiency (1%)
Environmental
1 deficiency (1%)
How citations are counted
Health citations are formal notices following inspections when they fail to comply with safety and care standards.
62 of 69 citations resulted from standard inspections; and 7 of 69 resulted from complaint investigations.
Includes all CMS health inspection records for this property, which could include management/ownership changes.
Source
Data sourced from CMS Health Deficiencies reports. Citation severity codes range from A (least serious) to L (most serious). Immediate Jeopardy (J-L) citations indicate situations where the facility's noncompliance has placed residents at risk of death or serious harm.
Show Inspection Reports
Enforcement
Penalties and fines
Penalties and fines
Federal penalties imposed by CMS for regulatory violations, including civil money penalties (fines) and denials of payment for new Medicare/Medicaid admissions.
Source: CMS Penalties Database · Data as of Aug 2026
3 penalties in the past 3 years
Latest: Jan 17, 2025 · $22,432 civil money penalty
Jan 17, 2025 · $22,432 civil money penalty
Oct 4, 2024 · $27,073 civil money penalty
Jul 19, 2024 · $8,278 civil money penalty
Total fines
$57,783
↓ 33% · WA $87KThis facility: $57,783, 33% below the Washington average of $86,517. Average among the 121 Washington facilities with a penalty on record.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.US avg $67KUS average: $67,417, among the 6,775 US facilities with a penalty on record.Rank #46 / 61Federal fines — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 46th out of 61 nursing homes we track in Washington for federal fines. Shows this facility's cumulative CMS federal fine dollars versus the Washington average among facilities with fines, and where it ranks among 61 facilities in the pool. Lower total dollars mean a better rank. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Washington that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
Number of fines
3
↑ 56% · WA 1.93This facility: 3, 56% above the Washington average of 1.93. Average among the 121 Washington facilities with a penalty on record.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.US avg 1.96US average: 1.96, among the 6,775 US facilities with a penalty on record.
Payment denials
Serious action where Medicare and/or Medicaid temporarily stops payments for new residents until issues are fixed.
Serious action where Medicare and/or Medicaid temporarily stops payments for new residents until issues are fixed.
0
WA avg 0.26Washington average: 0.26. Average among the 121 Washington facilities with a penalty on record.US avg 0.36US average: 0.36, among the 6,775 US facilities with a penalty on record.
Penalty history · past 3 years
Jan 17, 2025
Civil money penalty
Fines imposed for noncompliance, which can be assessed per day or per instance of violation.
$22,432
Fines imposed for noncompliance, which can be assessed per day or per instance of violation.
$22,432
Oct 4, 2024
Civil money penalty
Fines imposed for noncompliance, which can be assessed per day or per instance of violation.
$27,073
Fines imposed for noncompliance, which can be assessed per day or per instance of violation.
$27,073
Jul 19, 2024
Civil money penalty
Fines imposed for noncompliance, which can be assessed per day or per instance of violation.
$8,278
Fines imposed for noncompliance, which can be assessed per day or per instance of violation.
$8,278Fine amount comparison
This facility
$57,783
Washington average
$86,517
US average
$67,417
Totals count every penalty on record; the history lists the past 3 years. Washington and US averages are among facilities with a penalty on record.
A civil money penalty is a fine for noncompliance, per day or per instance. A payment denial stops Medicare/Medicaid payments for new residents until issues are fixed.
Health Outcomes
Quality of care over time
How residents at this home fare on health outcomes and preventive care, compared with the Washington average.
CMS star rating for the care of long-stay residents, who live at the home for 100 days or more. It is built from the long-stay quality measures below. 5 stars is the best.
4
/ 5
Above average
↑ 12% · WA 3.6This facility: 4.0, 12% above the WA average of 3.6 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
CMS star rating for the care of short-stay residents, mostly people recovering after a hospital stay for under 100 days. It is built from the short-stay quality measures below. 5 stars is the best.
2
/ 5
Below average
↓ 45% · WA 3.6This facility: 2.0, 45% below the WA average of 3.6 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Average of five long-stay measures: pressure ulcers, falls with major injury, unplanned weight loss, worsening ability to walk, and needing more help with daily activities. Each is the % of residents affected, so lower is better.
9.0
Score · lower is better
↑ 5% · WA 8.5This facility: 9.0, 5% above the WA average of 8.5 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Average of three long-stay measures: needing more help with daily activities, worsening ability to walk, and loss of bowel or bladder control. Each is the % of residents affected, so lower is better.
14.5
Score · lower is better
↓ 20% · WA 18.0This facility: 14.5, 20% below the WA average of 18.0 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.11 long-stay measures: 5 better, 3 worse, 3 near WA average
6 short-stay measures: 1 better, 4 worse, 1 compared with US only
Long-stay residents
People who live at the home · 11 measures
Daily care & independence
Needed more help with daily activities
Percent of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased
13.9%
↓ 2% · WA 14.2This facility: 13.9, 2% below the WA average of 14.2 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased
13.9%
↓ 2% · WA 14.2This facility: 13.9, 2% below the WA average of 14.2 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Walking ability worsened
Percent of long-stay residents whose ability to move independently worsened
17.2%
≈ 0% · WA 17.2This facility: 17.2, level with the WA average of 17.2 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents whose ability to move independently worsened
17.2%
≈ 0% · WA 17.2This facility: 17.2, level with the WA average of 17.2 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Bowel or bladder incontinence (low-risk residents)
Percent of low risk long-stay residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
12.2%
↓ 46% · WA 22.5This facility: 12.2, 46% below the WA average of 22.5 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of low risk long-stay residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
12.2%
↓ 46% · WA 22.5This facility: 12.2, 46% below the WA average of 22.5 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Safety & clinical stability
Urinary tract infection
Percent of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection
0.5%
↓ 67% · WA 1.6This facility: 0.5, 67% below the WA average of 1.6 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection
0.5%
↓ 67% · WA 1.6This facility: 0.5, 67% below the WA average of 1.6 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Falls with major injury
Percent of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
2.0%
↓ 21% · WA 2.6This facility: 2.0, 21% below the WA average of 2.6 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
2.0%
↓ 21% · WA 2.6This facility: 2.0, 21% below the WA average of 2.6 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Pressure ulcers (high-risk residents)
Percent of long-stay high risk residents with pressure ulcers
3.4%
↓ 20% · WA 4.3This facility: 3.4, 20% below the WA average of 4.3 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay high risk residents with pressure ulcers
3.4%
↓ 20% · WA 4.3This facility: 3.4, 20% below the WA average of 4.3 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Physical & mental health
Lost too much weight
Percent of long-stay residents who lose too much weight
8.4%
↑ 52% · WA 5.5This facility: 8.4, 52% above the WA average of 5.5 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents who lose too much weight
8.4%
↑ 52% · WA 5.5This facility: 8.4, 52% above the WA average of 5.5 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Depressive symptoms
Percent of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms
5.1%
↓ 71% · WA 17.7This facility: 5.1, 71% below the WA average of 17.7 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms
5.1%
↓ 71% · WA 17.7This facility: 5.1, 71% below the WA average of 17.7 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Antipsychotic use
Percent of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
47.9%
↑ 216% · WA 15.1This facility: 47.9, 216% above the WA average of 15.1 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
47.9%
↑ 216% · WA 15.1This facility: 47.9, 216% above the WA average of 15.1 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Preventive care
Pneumococcal vaccine
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
88.3%
↓ 8% · WA 96.0This facility: 88.3, 8% below the WA average of 96.0 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
88.3%
↓ 8% · WA 96.0This facility: 88.3, 8% below the WA average of 96.0 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Flu vaccine
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
92.4%
↓ 2% · WA 93.8This facility: 92.4, 2% below the WA average of 93.8 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
92.4%
↓ 2% · WA 93.8This facility: 92.4, 2% below the WA average of 93.8 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Short-stay residents
Rehab and recovery after a hospital stay · 6 measures
Daily care & independence
Returned home or to the community
Rate of successful return to home or community from a skilled nursing facility.
38.8%
↓ 23% · US 50.6This facility: 38.8, 23% below the US average of 50.6 (among US facilities reporting a recent figure).
Rate of successful return to home or community from a skilled nursing facility.
38.8%
↓ 23% · US 50.6This facility: 38.8, 23% below the US average of 50.6 (among US facilities reporting a recent figure).Physical & mental health
New antipsychotic medication
Percent of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication
1.0%
↓ 22% · WA 1.3This facility: 1.0, 22% below the WA average of 1.3 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication
1.0%
↓ 22% · WA 1.3This facility: 1.0, 22% below the WA average of 1.3 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Preventive care
Pneumococcal vaccine
Percent of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
79.3%
↓ 10% · WA 88.3This facility: 79.3, 10% below the WA average of 88.3 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
79.3%
↓ 10% · WA 88.3This facility: 79.3, 10% below the WA average of 88.3 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Flu vaccine
Percent of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
59.0%
↓ 28% · WA 82.0This facility: 59.0, 28% below the WA average of 82.0 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
59.0%
↓ 28% · WA 82.0This facility: 59.0, 28% below the WA average of 82.0 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Hospital & emergency visits
Re-hospitalized after admission
Percentage of short-stay residents who were re-hospitalized after their nursing home admission.
28.8%
↑ 45% · WA 19.9This facility: 28.8, 45% above the WA average of 19.9 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percentage of short-stay residents who were re-hospitalized after their nursing home admission.
28.8%
↑ 45% · WA 19.9This facility: 28.8, 45% above the WA average of 19.9 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
ER visits
Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit.
27.8%
↑ 111% · WA 13.2This facility: 27.8, 111% above the WA average of 13.2 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit.
27.8%
↑ 111% · WA 13.2This facility: 27.8, 111% above the WA average of 13.2 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Arrows show whether a figure is above or below the average. Green is better for residents, red is worse, and yellow means within 5% of the average. Grey compares with the US average only, because CMS publishes no state figure. The line on each bar marks the average.
Quality measures are calculated by CMS from Minimum Data Set (MDS) resident assessments and Medicare claims.
Money and staffing.
Avamere at Pacific Ridge’s finances from its CMS cost report for the fiscal year ending December 2024, compared with 60 Washington nursing homes that filed a recent report. Includes all financial data for this property, which could include management/ownership changes.
FY Dec 2024
Is it financially stable?
Losing money on care, and more than last year
−15.0% operating margin
−1.5 pts vs prior year
An operating loss in 8 of the last 8 reported years. Other income ($1.6M) trims the net loss to −$0.2M. Watch for cost-cutting that reaches staffing.
Does it invest in staff?
Payroll in line with Washington homes
65.3% payroll share of revenue
WA average 64.4%Rank #16 / 60Payroll % of net patient revenue — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 16th out of 60 nursing homes we track in Washington for payroll % of net patient revenue. Shows payroll as a percentage of net patient revenue versus the Washington average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Below 25% may signal understaffing or heavy agency use — read with Staffing ratings. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Washington that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
Payroll rose $1.1M while revenue rose $0.8M. Check hours per resident in the staffing section to confirm it reaches the floor.
FY 2024 scorecard
Each row shows the FY 2024 figure, the change since the prior report, the trend, and how it compares with Washington homes.
Revenue & profit
Losing money on care
| Metric | FY 2024 | vs prior year | Trend 2017 → 2024Trend | WA median | Compared with WA homesRank in WA | In short |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net patient revenue What the home earns from resident care, after discounts and bad debt. | $12.2M | +$0.8M | Trend 20172024 | WA median $13.7M | Rank in WA Rank #41 / 60Net patient revenue — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 41st out of 60 nursing homes we track in Washington for net patient revenue. Shows this facility's net patient revenue compared to the Washington average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Higher revenue generally means more resources for staffing and capital — read alongside Payroll %. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Washington that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. Higher than 32% of homes | Below WA median Higher net patient revenue than 32% of WA homes that filed a recent report. Revenue mostly follows how big a home is. |
| Operating expenses Everything it costs to run the home: staff, supplies, rent, admin. | $14.0M | +$1.1M | Trend 20172024 | WA median — | Rank in WA Not ranked | Exceeds revenue Operating expenses are higher than net patient revenue, so resident care runs at a loss. |
| Net patient income Revenue minus operating expenses. Negative means care loses money. | −$1.8M | −$0.3M | Trend 20172024 | WA median — | Rank in WA Not ranked | Loss, widening Resident care lost money this year, more than in the prior report. |
| Operating margin Net patient income as a share of revenue. The clearest health signal. | −15.0% | −1.5 pts | Trend 20172024 | WA median — | Rank in WA Not ranked | Loss A negative margin means resident care costs more than it earns. |
| Other income Money not from resident care: investments, grants, services. | $1.6M | — | Trend — | WA median — | Rank in WA Not ranked | Offsets part of the loss Income from outside resident care covers part of the loss on care. |
| Net income The bottom line after other income. | −$0.2M | −$0.8M | Trend — | WA median — | Rank in WA Not ranked | Loss The bottom line is below zero even after other income. |
Staffing spend
Staff spending in line with Washington homes
| Metric | FY 2024 | vs prior year | Trend 2017 → 2024Trend | WA median | Compared with WA homesRank in WA | In short |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Payroll costs Salaries and wage-related benefits, not counting contract labor. | $7.9M | +$1.1M | Trend 20172024 | WA median $8.4M | Rank in WA Rank #33 / 60Payroll costs — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 33rd out of 60 nursing homes we track in Washington for payroll costs. Shows total staff payroll — salaries plus wage-related benefits — benchmarked to the Washington average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Higher payroll relative to peers often signals better staffing and less reliance on contract labor. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Washington that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. Higher than 46% of homes | Below WA median Higher payroll than 46% of WA homes. Payroll in dollars mostly follows how big a home is, so this compares size, not staffing levels. |
| Payroll share of revenue Payroll divided by revenue. Higher usually means more staff per resident. | 65.3% | +5.6 pts | Trend 20172024 | WA median 58.9% | Rank in WA Rank #16 / 60Payroll % of net patient revenue — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 16th out of 60 nursing homes we track in Washington for payroll % of net patient revenue. Shows payroll as a percentage of net patient revenue versus the Washington average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Below 25% may signal understaffing or heavy agency use — read with Staffing ratings. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Washington that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. Higher than 75% of homes | Near WA average The WA average is 64.4% of revenue. Within 3 points of it reads as near the average. |
Charts, 2017–2024 2 charts · WA benchmark drawn as a dashed line
Revenue, expenses and income
What the home earned from resident care (net patient revenue), what it cost to run (operating expenses) and the difference between the two (net patient income), for each fiscal year it filed a CMS cost report.
USD, millions
Net patient revenue Operating expenses Net patient income
Where revenue goes
Both lines are a share of net patient revenue. Payroll share is what goes to salaries and wage-related benefits; operating margin is what is left after every operating cost (below 0%, resident care lost money). The dashed line is the Washington payroll average.
% of net patient revenue
Payroll share Operating margin WA payroll average
Year-by-year data, 2017–2024 every reported year · latest first, scroll sideways
| Metric | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net patient revenue | $8.6M | $9.0M | $9.6M | $10.5M | $9.4M | $10.0M | $11.4M | $12.2M |
| Operating expenses | $9.0M | $9.0M | $9.8M | $11.2M | $11.5M | $11.8M | $12.9M | $14.0M |
| Net patient income | −$0.4M | −$0.0M | −$0.3M | −$0.7M | −$2.1M | −$1.8M | −$1.5M | −$1.8M |
| Operating margin | −4.9% | −0.4% | −2.9% | −6.6% | −22.3% | −17.8% | −13.6% | −15.0% |
| Net income | −$0.4M | −$0.0M | −$0.3M | $1.0M | −$1.9M | $0.1M | $0.6M | −$0.2M |
| Payroll costs | $5.2M | $5.3M | $5.6M | $5.1M | $5.6M | $6.3M | $6.8M | $7.9M |
| Payroll share of revenue | 61.2% | 59.3% | 58.8% | 48.7% | 59.0% | 63.1% | 59.7% | 65.3% |
| Beds | 102 | 102 | 102 | 102 | 102 | 102 | 102 | 102 |
| Gross revenue | $11.3M | $11.3M | $12.7M | $11.6M | $11.2M | $11.1M | $12.2M | $12.2M |
| Salaries | $4.2M | $4.4M | $4.7M | $4.3M | $4.7M | $5.5M | $5.8M | $6.6M |
| Wage-related costs | $1.0M | $0.9M | $0.9M | $0.8M | $0.8M | $0.9M | $1.0M | $1.3M |
| Contract labor | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Other operating costs | $3.7M | $3.7M | $4.2M | $6.1M | $6.0M | $5.5M | $6.1M | $6.1M |
| Net patient revenue per day | $246 | $283 | $275 | $324 | $334 | $369 | $405 | $435 |
| Cost per day | $258 | $284 | $283 | $346 | $408 | $435 | $460 | $501 |
| Average length of stay | 246.5 days | 209.3 days | 204.5 days | 183.4 days | 195.7 days | 89.1 days | 62.0 days | 74.6 days |
Showing 2024–2022 · scroll sideways for 5 earlier years
Earlier and partial years are in the download. Download CSV
Who this home usually serves
Residents split by who pays for their care: Medicare, Medicaid, or private pay and other sources.
Over a year: CMS SNF Cost Report, FY2024
Snapshot: CMS Long-Term Care Facility Characteristics (quarterly), Jun 2026
Arriving
368 admissions · FY2024
Residents admitted during the year.
Medicare
22 · 6%
Medicaid
94 · 26%
Private pay & other
252 · 68%
Resident snapshot
67 residents · Jun 2026
Residents counted on the date of the latest CMS report, which updates quarterly.
Medicare
1 · 1%
Medicaid
50 · 75%
Private pay & other
16 · 24%
Leaving
375 discharges · FY2024
Residents discharged during the year.
Medicare
11 · 3%
Medicaid
180 · 48%
Private pay & other
184 · 49%
Primarily long-term care, limited rehab
Most residents stay long-term, while a smaller portion are admitted for short-term rehab.
Places of interest near Avamere at Pacific Ridge
2.1 miles from city center
Estimated distance in miles from Tacoma's city center to Avamere at Pacific Ridge's address, calculated via Google Maps.
— 1.63 miles to nearest hospital (St Joseph Medical Center)
Calculate Travel Distance to Avamere at Pacific Ridge
Add your location
Compare Nursing Homes around Tacoma
Info below is compiled from CMS reports & the WA Dept. of Social & Health Services (DSHS), senior community websites & trusted data sources such as Walk Score & BBB.
Communities are listed from highest-ranked to lowest-ranked based on our methodology.
The facility name. Click to view the full profile page on Assisted Living Magazine, including photos, services, and contact info.
|
CMS (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the federal agency that regulates nursing homes) Overall 5-star rating — a composite of Health Inspection, Staffing, and Quality Measures scores. 5 stars = top 10% nationally. 1 star = bottom 10%. The single most important number to start with when comparing facilities.
|
Care Types in This Table
NH (Nursing Home):
24/7 skilled nursing care for residents with complex, ongoing medical needs.
SNF (Skilled Nursing Facility):
Round-the-clock nursing care, often for recovery after surgery, injury, or illness.
MC (Memory Care):
Secured, specialized care for people living with Alzheimer's or dementia.
|
Neighborhood or city area where the facility is located. Proximity to family, hospitals, and green space matters for both quality of life and ease of visitation. Consider drive time and transit access when evaluating location.
|
Licensed bed capacity. Larger facilities (300+ beds) often have more specialized programs but can feel institutional. Smaller homes (under 150 beds) tend to deliver more personalized care. Compare with Avg Res/Day to understand how full the facility typically runs.
|
A 0–100 score of a facility's regulatory inspection record, shown as a letter and compared with other facilities of the same kind in the same state. This is a proprietary Assisted Living Magazine grade. It is not a government rating. A dash means we have no inspection data for that facility.
|
Percentage of licensed beds filled on an average day. Color indicates financial health: green (90%+) = operationally strong, typically profitable. Amber (80–89%) = stable but leaving revenue on the table. Orange (70–79%) = financial strain likely, may struggle with fixed costs. Red (<70%) = significant distress, closure or ownership change risk increases sharply.
|
This facility's occupancy rate compared to the statewide average for similar facilities. A positive number means above-average demand. Facilities running 5%+ above the state average are typically the most sought-after in their market — a strong proxy for reputation.
|
CMS-adjusted total nurse hours per resident per day (RN + LPN + CNA combined). The national average is approximately 3.5 hrs. Higher is better — more direct care time per resident. Below 3.0 is a red flag. CMS weights RN hours more heavily because RNs handle complex clinical decisions that CNAs cannot.
|
CMS Health Inspection star rating (1–5 stars), based on the 3 most recent annual state surveys plus any complaint investigations. This is the hardest rating to manipulate — it reflects real surveyor findings on-site. 5 stars = fewest deficiencies found. 1 star = most. It carries the heaviest weight in the Overall CMS rating.
|
CMS Staffing star rating (1–5 stars), based on daily nurse staffing hours submitted to CMS via verified payroll data. Compares RN, LPN, and CNA coverage relative to resident acuity level. 5 stars = well above expected staffing. Weekend staffing is evaluated separately, as that's where many facilities quietly reduce coverage.
|
CMS Quality Measures star rating (1–5 stars), based on 15 clinical outcome metrics including fall rates, pressure ulcers, antipsychotic drug use, and hospital readmissions. Captures actual resident health outcomes, not just compliance. High QM combined with low Health Inspection scores can indicate a facility with strong care but weak documentation practices.
|
Registered Nurse hours per resident/day compared to the statewide average. RNs are the highest-skilled nursing staff — they assess residents, manage medications, and respond to emergencies. A value of +50% means RN coverage is 50% above the state norm. Negative values are a concern for residents with complex or acute medical needs.
|
Total nursing staff hours (RN + LPN + CNA combined) per resident/day vs. the statewide average. A broader measure than RN vs State — it captures the entire care team. A facility can have high total staffing but low RN hours, meaning more aides and fewer nurses. Read both columns together for the full picture.
|
Total dollar amount of federal monetary fines (civil money penalties) issued by CMS in the past 3 years. Fines are only levied for serious violations — typically actual harm to residents, repeated uncorrected deficiencies, or systemic non-compliance. Even a single fine is noteworthy. Multiple fines strongly suggest a pattern, not isolated incidents.
|
Total health deficiency citations from the most recent standard inspection cycle. Minor citations (scope A–C) are common and often administrative in nature. Higher counts aren't always disqualifying, but should be read alongside Severe Citations to understand actual harm levels. Under 10 is strong for a large facility; 30+ warrants a closer look.
|
Average deficiency citations per CMS inspection (survey) in the reporting window — total citations divided by the number of inspections. Lower is better; compare alongside total Citations and Severe Citations for context.
|
Citations at CMS scope/severity level G or higher — G–I means actual harm occurred; J–L means residents were placed in immediate jeopardy. (D–F is potential for harm only). Examples include unaddressed falls, medication errors causing injury, neglect, or abuse.
|
Average number of residents in the building on any given day, derived from annual census data. Reflects true operating scale — a 400-bed facility running 200 residents/day operates very differently from one at 390. Higher resident counts generally mean more funded staffing hours.
|
Better Business Bureau rating (A+ to F). Reflects complaint history, business transparency, and how family disputes were resolved. A+ means no significant unresolved complaints. A blank (—) means the facility isn't BBB-accredited, which is common for healthcare providers and not necessarily a negative signal.
|
Walk Score® (0–100). Measures walkability of the surrounding area. 90–100 = Walker's Paradise. 70–89 = Very Walkable. 50–69 = Somewhat Walkable. Below 50 = Car-Dependent. Higher scores benefit family visitors, resident outings, and staff commuting.
|
The licensed owner or operator of record filed with CMS — the individual or organization legally accountable for the facility. Searching the operator name across other facilities can reveal chain or multi-site ownership, which matters: chain-operated homes tend to have more variable quality outcomes than independently run facilities.
|
What the home actually collects for resident care, after contractual allowances, bad debt and discounts — not gross billings. Taken from the latest complete annual cost report, so it is comparable across homes reporting the same period. Revenue alone doesn't indicate care quality, but it funds staffing and capital reinvestment. Pair with Payroll %. Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
Staff salaries plus wage-related benefits from the latest complete annual cost report. Contract and agency labour is counted separately, under other operating costs, so a home leaning on agency staff can show a low figure here. Payroll is the cost most directly tied to care quality — compare with Payroll % for full context. Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
Payroll as a share of NET PATIENT REVENUE (not gross revenue). Both figures come from the same cost-report year. A higher figure means more of each revenue dollar goes to staff pay. Read with the Staffing star rating to judge whether spend translates into coverage — and note that homes whose patient revenue covers only part of their operation can read implausibly high. The Washington average is: 64.4% Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
CMS Certification Number: the unique federal identifier for this skilled nursing provider.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Life Care Center of South Hill | NH SNF | Puyallup | 100
Facility
100
WA AVG
90
Rank
#28 / 69 | A+ |
98.1%
Facility
98.1%
WA AVG
77.6%
Rank
#3 / 56 | +26% | 4.05
Facility
4.05
WA AVG
4.29
Rank
#45 / 60 | -15% | -5% | $17.4k
Facility
$17.4k
WA AVG
$89.5k
Rank
#32 / 61 | 29
Facility
29
WA AVG
49.6
Rank
#10 / 61 | 5.8
Facility
5.8
WA AVG
6.2
Rank
#31 / 61 | 1 | 98 | - |
32
Facility
32
WA AVG
51
Rank
#59 / 80 | Alexander Medina | $23.7MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$23.7MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$16.6M
Rank
#10 / 60 | $13.6MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$13.6MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$10.1M
Rank
#13 / 60 | 57.5%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
57.5%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
64.4%
Rank
#35 / 60 | 505526 | ||||
| Avamere at Pacific Ridge | NH MC SNF | Tacoma (Eastside) | 102
Facility
102
WA AVG
90
Rank
#24 / 69 | C |
65.7%
Facility
65.7%
WA AVG
77.6%
Rank
#48 / 56 | -15% | 5.19
Facility
5.19
WA AVG
4.29
Rank
#3 / 60 | -62% | +21% | $57.8k
Facility
$57.8k
WA AVG
$89.5k
Rank
#46 / 61 | 69
Facility
69
WA AVG
49.6
Rank
#49 / 61 | 6.9
Facility
6.9
WA AVG
6.2
Rank
#39 / 61 | 4 | 67 | - |
56
Facility
56
WA AVG
51
Rank
#33 / 80 | Christine Miller | $12.2MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$12.2MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$16.6M
Rank
#41 / 60 | $7.9MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$7.9MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$10.1M
Rank
#33 / 60 | 65.3%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
65.3%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
64.4%
Rank
#16 / 60 | 505264 | ||||
| North Auburn Rehabilitation & Health Center | NH SNF | Auburn (Christopher) | 125
Facility
125
WA AVG
90
Rank
#13 / 69 | C |
59.4%
Facility
59.4%
WA AVG
77.6%
Rank
#49 / 56 | -23% | 3.94
Facility
3.94
WA AVG
4.29
Rank
#38 / 60 | -35% | -8% | $12.0k
Facility
$12.0k
WA AVG
$89.5k
Rank
#29 / 61 | 102
Facility
102
WA AVG
49.6
Rank
#56 / 61 | 12.8
Facility
12.8
WA AVG
6.2
Rank
#58 / 61 | 4 | 74 | - |
58
Facility
58
WA AVG
51
Rank
#32 / 80 | Joseph Denor | $11.1MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$11.1MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$16.6M
Rank
#46 / 60 | $6.6MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$6.6MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$10.1M
Rank
#45 / 60 | 59.7%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
59.7%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
64.4%
Rank
#28 / 60 | 505195 | ||||
| Life Care Center of Puyallup | NH SNF | Puyallup (Meeker) | 102
Facility
102
WA AVG
90
Rank
#24 / 69 | ? |
92.5%
Facility
92.5%
WA AVG
77.6%
Rank
#10 / 56 | +19% | 4.12
Facility
4.12
WA AVG
4.29
Rank
#30 / 60 | +18% | -4% | $0
Facility
$0
WA AVG
$89.5k
Rank
#1 / 61 | 38
Facility
38
WA AVG
49.6
Rank
#24 / 61 | 4.2
Facility
4.2
WA AVG
6.2
Rank
#14 / 61 | 1 | 94 | - |
65
Facility
65
WA AVG
51
Rank
#22 / 80 | Paul Nimz | $12.8MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$12.8MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$16.6M
Rank
#34 / 60 | $8.0MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$8.0MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$10.1M
Rank
#32 / 60 | 62.8%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
62.8%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
64.4%
Rank
#22 / 60 | 505324 |
Rank badges are statewide and care-type specific: each nursing home is ranked against every other WA nursing home we track that reports that metric, not just the 4 on this page. See how we rank facilities
Financial Assistance for
Nursing Home in Washington
Avamere at Pacific Ridge is located in Tacoma, Washington State.
Here are the financial assistance programs available to residents in Washington State.
Frequently Asked Questions about Avamere at Pacific Ridge
What neighborhood is Avamere at Pacific Ridge in?
Avamere at Pacific Ridge is in the Eastside neighborhood of Tacoma.
Is Avamere at Pacific Ridge in a walkable area?
Avamere at Pacific Ridge has a walk score of 56. Somewhat walkable. Some errands can be accomplished on foot, with a mix of nearby amenities.
What is the occupancy rate at Avamere at Pacific Ridge?
Avamere at Pacific Ridge's occupancy is 65.7%.
Are pets allowed at Avamere at Pacific Ridge?
No, Avamere at Pacific Ridge has a no-pet policy.
Does Avamere at Pacific Ridge operate as a for-profit or non-profit?
Avamere at Pacific Ridge is registered as a for-profit.
What is the overall rating for Avamere at Pacific Ridge?
Avamere at Pacific Ridge received a 2-star overall rating from the CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services). This score combines results from staffing levels, quality measures, and health inspections.
How many beds does Avamere at Pacific Ridge have?
Avamere at Pacific Ridge has 102 beds.
Guides for Better Senior Living
Care Cost Calculator: See Prices in Your Area
Nursing Home Data Explorer
Don’t Wait Too Long: 7 Red Flag Signs Your Parent Needs Assisted Living Now
The True Cost of Assisted Living in 2025 – And How Families Are Paying For It
Understanding Senior Living Costs: Pricing Models, Discounts & Financial Assistance
Updated on
