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.
65
40 employees · 25 contractors · 21 on an average day Woodland Assisted Living
Nursing Home, Assisted Living, Hospice Care, Independent Living, Palliative Care, Respite Care & Skilled Nursing · Woodland, WA
ALM Inspection Grade
B
ALM's inspection grade is 86 / 100, a B — a combined grade: its CMS-certified nursing-home beds and its state-licensed beds, weighted by bed count · 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 86 / 100, a B — a combined grade: its CMS-certified nursing-home beds and its state-licensed beds, weighted by bed count · 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.
Woodland Assisted Living
Nursing Home, Assisted Living, Hospice Care, Independent Living, Palliative Care, Respite Care & Skilled Nursing · Woodland, WA
ALM Inspection Grade
B
ALM's inspection grade is 86 / 100, a B — a combined grade: its CMS-certified nursing-home beds and its state-licensed beds, weighted by bed count · 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 86 / 100, a B — a combined grade: its CMS-certified nursing-home beds and its state-licensed beds, weighted by bed count · 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.
Woodland Assisted Living accepts Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay.
Woodland Assisted Living provides independent living, assisted living, skilled nursing, nursing home care, palliative options, hospice care, and respite stays in Woodland, Washington. The 32-bed community allows residents to adjust their care levels on site as personal needs change. Hands-on nursing care averages 3 hours and 29 minutes per resident daily. Facility amenities include 14 private rehabilitation suites, a hydrotherapy tub, a salon, landscaped courtyards, a walking path, and scheduled non-denominational religious services.
Director Justin Settlemier manages the location, which accepts Medicare, Medicaid, and private payment. Residents have access to weekly van or bus outings, while a walk score of 62 allows non-drivers to run select local errands on foot.
Families seeking multi-level care options or short-term respite coverage can reach out to Woodland Assisted Living for current space availability and service details.
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: Q2 2026 (April 1 – June 30, 2026).
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 Sep 2026).
Total nursing care per resident / day
This nursing home is ranked 53rd out of 59 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.
3h 29m
This nursing home is ranked 53rd out of 59 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.
3h 29mStandout metric: Registered nurse (RN) is +11% above Washington average
5 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 6 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
6 staff · 8.3-hour shifts
1h 5m
↑ 11% · WA 59mThis facility: 1h 5m per resident per day, 11% above the Washington average of 59m (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 6 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
6 staff · 8.3-hour shiftsUS average: 42m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 42m
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 4 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
4 staff · 8.1-hour shifts
28m
↓ 36% · WA 43mThis facility: 28m per resident per day, 36% below the Washington average of 43m (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 4 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
4 staff · 8.1-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. 26 total: 22 of the facility's own employees and 4 agency contractors.
26 staff · 7.6-hour shifts
1h 56m
↓ 29% · WA 2h 43mThis facility: 1h 56m per resident per day, 29% below the Washington average of 2h 43m (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. 26 total: 22 of the facility's own employees and 4 agency contractors.
26 staff · 7.6-hour shiftsUS average: 2h 26m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 2h 26m
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. All 2 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
2 staff · 5.7-hour shifts
2m
↓ 71% · WA 5mThis facility: 2m per resident per day, 71% 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. All 2 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
2 staff · 5.7-hour shiftsUS 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
2h 37m
↓ 31% · WA 3h 49mThis facility: 2h 37m per resident per day, 31% below the Washington average of 3h 49m (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 32m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 3h 32m
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
41m
↓ 4% · WA 43mThis facility: 41m per resident per day, 4% below the Washington average of 43m (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.
65
40 employees · 25 contractors · 21 on an average day
65 total staff / 49 residents. Residents: CMS Long-Term Care Facility Characteristics (data as of Sep 2026); staff: CMS Payroll-Based Journal (Q2 2026).Residents and staff come from two different CMS releases, so the two counts can be a few months apart.
1.33 : 1
↓ 24% · WA 1.75This facility: 1.33 staff per resident, 24% below the Washington average of 1.75 (among Washington facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
65 staff ÷ 49 residents
See full Washington ranking →
Average hours one staff member works on a day they are on shift, across every role.
7.4 h
↓ 8% · WA 8 hThis facility: 7.4 h, 8% 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.
14,192 staff hours this quarter
See full Washington ranking →92.1% of staff hours were worked by the facility's own employees
Washington average: 93.9% · Contractors this quarter: Certified Nursing Assistant (4), Speech Language Pathologist (4), Qualified Social Worker (4), Respiratory Therapy Technician (3), Physical Therapy Assistant (2), Diagnostic X-ray Services Staff (2), Occupational Therapy Assistant (2), Medical Director (1), Other Physician (1), Occupational Therapy Aide (1), Physical Therapy Aide (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 smaller, more intimate setting that may offer a quieter environment and closer staff-resident interactions.
94
Rank #45 / 69Bed count — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 45th 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 smaller, more intimate setting that may offer a quieter environment and closer staff-resident interactions.
94
Rank #45 / 69Bed count — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 45th 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.Smaller home · May offer a more intimate, personalized care environment.
62 nursing-home beds (CMS) + 32 state-licensed beds.
Years of operating
A longer operating history, which may indicate experience navigating regulations and delivering ongoing care. This is the number of years in operation under current management.
Rank #6 / 17Years in operation — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 6th out of 17 nursing homes we track in Washington for years in operation. Shows how long this facility has been in operation compared to other Washington facilities. Longer operating histories may 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.
A longer operating history, which may indicate experience navigating regulations and delivering ongoing care. This is the number of years in operation under current management.
Rank #6 / 17Years in operation — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 6th out of 17 nursing homes we track in Washington for years in operation. Shows how long this facility has been in operation compared to other Washington facilities. Longer operating histories may 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.
32
years
Walk Score
Somewhat walkable. Some errands can be accomplished on foot, with a mix of nearby amenities.
Rank #26 / 80Walk Score — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 26th 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 #26 / 80Walk Score — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 26th 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.
62
/ 100
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.
40
Source: CMS Provider Information, average daily residents (data as of Oct 2026)
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.
119
days
BBB Rating
An independent rating from the Better Business Bureau based on factors such as complaint history, transparency, and business practices.
An independent rating from the Better Business Bureau based on factors such as complaint history, transparency, and business practices.
A+
Not Accredited
How BBB ratings workAbout This Community
CountyClark
License Number1028
CMS Certification Number505232
Resident Council
CNA Training Program
TransportationListed as: Weekly Van/Bus Outings
Pets not allowed
Wi-Fi
Cable Tv
Courtyard
Walking Paths
Religious ServicesNon-denominational church services and bible study
In-Room Features
Hi/Low Electric Beds
This profile shows two inspection records, and their totals often differ. Inspection History and the Inspection Scorecard below are state data — the figures the state publishes and the state inspection reports we hold on file — covering the entire facility. CMS Health Inspection History covers only this home's Medicare and Medicaid-certified nursing beds, from federal certification surveys.
Inspection History
In Washington, the Department of Social and Health Services, Residential Care Services conducts unannounced inspections and issues reports on the quality of care in all licensed settings.
Since 2023 · 3 years of data
These figures come from state-published data and the state inspection reports we hold on file. The period covered can vary depending on document availability.
Includes all inspection records for this property, which could include management/ownership changes. 24 deficiencies 9 inspections
Includes all inspection records for this property, which could include management/ownership changes. 24 deficiencies 9 inspections
ALM Inspection Grade
86 / 100
Combined grade: CMS inspection data for this community's nursing-home beds and
Washington inspection data for its
state-licensed beds, weighted by bed count
How the two records combine
Nursing-home beds (CMS) · 66% of the grade
B+ · 88/100
6 points above the Washington average for CMS-certified facilities (82/100).
62 certified beds, 66% of the grade. Graded with CMS-certified facilities on the national scale.
Citations
Typical
82 severity-weighted points (22 deficiencies) · 33% lower 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) · $31,793 in fines
Persistence
Concern
44 days to fix issues · slower than the typical CMS-certified WA facility (median: 37)
Washington state-licensed beds · 34% of the grade
B- · 81/100
2 points below the Washington average for state-licensed facilities (83/100).
32 licensed beds, 34% of the grade. Graded with Washington state-licensed facilities on the Washington scale.
Deficiencies
Concern
0.75 deficiencies per resident bed (24 across 32 beds) · 3× more than the typical state-licensed WA facility (median: 0.29)
2.7 deficiencies per inspection (24 in 9 inspections) · 3% fewer than the typical state-licensed WA facility (median: 2.7)
How the final grade is calculated
B · 86/100
88 × 66% + 81 × 34% = 86 / 100
The two grades are combined in proportion to the beds each record covers: 62 CMS-certified nursing-home beds (66%) and 32 Washington state-licensed beds (34%). The result, 86 out of 100, is a B on the same scale every ALM Inspection Grade uses.
Inspection Scorecard
This scorecard compares key inspection, deficiency, and complaint metrics at this facility against the Washington state average. Metrics rated ≥15% worse than average are highlighted in red; those ≥15% better are highlighted in green.
Since 2023 vs. Washington state average
Overall vs. WA average
0 Worse
No metrics in this bucket.
2 Better
Metrics better than Washington average:
• Total deficiencies (14% below)
• Deficiencies per inspection (13% below)
• Total deficiencies (14% below)
• Deficiencies per inspection (13% below)
Deficiencies
| This Facility | WA Average | vs. WA Avg |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Total deficiencies
Formal regulatory issues recorded by inspectors across all inspection types.
| 24 | 28.0 | This facility has 14% fewer total deficiencies than a typical Washington nursing home (24 vs. WA avg 28).↓ 14% better |
|
Deficiencies per inspection
Average deficiencies per inspection.
| 2.7 | 3.1 | This facility has 13% fewer deficiencies per inspection than a typical Washington nursing home (2.7 vs. WA avg 3.1).↓ 13% better |
Inspections
| This Facility | WA Average | vs. WA Avg |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Total inspections
Combined count of all inspections conducted at this facility.
| 9 | 9.0 | This facility has total inspections in line with the Washington average (9 vs. WA avg 9).— At avg |
CMS Health Inspection History
Federal inspection data published by CMS, covering this home's Medicare and/or Medicaid-certified skilled-nursing/nursing beds only.
Total health inspections
7
↓ 20% · WA 8.8This facility: 7, 20% below the WA average of 8.8 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Total health citations
33
Rank #6 / 61Health citations — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 6th 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.↓ 34% · WA 49.9This facility: 33, 34% below the WA average of 49.9 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Citations per inspection
4.71
Rank #3 / 61Citations per inspection — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 3rd 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.↓ 24% · WA 6.18This facility: 4.71, 24% below the WA average of 6.18 (among WA 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
33 of 33 citations corrected
Critical
J–L
1
↑ 233% · WA 0.3This facility: 1, 233% above the WA average of 0.3 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Immediate jeopardy
Serious
G–I
1
↓ 41% · WA 1.7This facility: 1, 41% below the WA average of 1.7 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Actual harm
Moderate
D–F
31
↓ 35% · WA 47.4This facility: 31, 35% below the WA average of 47.4 (among WA 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
0
↓ 100% · WA 0.5This facility: 0, 100% below the WA average of 0.5 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
No harm, minimal riskLatest inspection: Aug 06, 2026 · 15 citations, all corrected
Most cited category: Quality of Life & Care, 7 of 33 citations · 10 categories in total
Citations history
Most recent first
Aug 06, 2026
15 citations
Nutrition moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Nursing Services moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights 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
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Pharmacy moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Environmental moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Jun 09, 2026
1 citation
Pharmacy moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Mar 30, 2026
1 citation
Quality of Care serious citation
Corrected
Corrected
Jun 20, 2025
7 citations
Abuse/Neglect moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Pharmacy moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Pharmacy moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
May 21, 2025
1 citation
Administration moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
May 03, 2024
7 citations
Nutrition moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Abuse/Neglect moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Oct 27, 2023
1 citation
Quality of Care critical citation
Corrected
Corrected
Top deficiency categories
Share of 33 citations
Quality of Life & Care
7 deficiencies (21%)
Resident Rights
6 deficiencies (18%)
Resident Assessment & Care Planning
5 deficiencies (15%)
Infection Control
4 deficiencies (12%)
Pharmacy Services
4 deficiencies (12%)
Nutrition & Dietary
2 deficiencies (6%)
Abuse, Neglect & Exploitation
2 deficiencies (6%)
Administration
1 deficiency (3%)
Nursing & Physician Services
1 deficiency (3%)
Environmental
1 deficiency (3%)
How citations are counted
Health citations are formal notices following inspections when they fail to comply with safety and care standards.
27 of 33 citations resulted from standard inspections; 4 of 33 resulted from complaint investigations; and 2 of 33 came from combined inspections (standard and complaint).
Includes all CMS health inspection records for this property, which could include management/ownership changes.
Source
Data sourced from CMS Health Deficiencies reports, which cover the Medicare and/or Medicaid-certified skilled-nursing and nursing beds and no other part of the community. 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.
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 Oct 2026
3 penalties in the past 3 years
Latest: Mar 30, 2026 · $9,110 civil money penalty
Mar 30, 2026 · $9,110 civil money penalty
Oct 27, 2023 · $17,778 civil money penalty
Jun 20, 2025 · 23-day payment denial
Total fines
$26,888
↓ 67% · WA $80KThis facility: $26,888, 67% below the Washington average of $80,436. Average among the 116 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 $66KUS average: $66,281, among the 6,725 US facilities with a penalty on record.Rank #37 / 61Federal fines — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 37th 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
2
↑ 6% · WA 1.89This facility: 2, 6% above the Washington average of 1.89. Average among the 116 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 1.88US average: 1.88, among the 6,725 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.
1
23 days
↑ 300% · WA 0.25This facility: 1, 300% above the Washington average of 0.25. Average among the 116 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 0.35US average: 0.35, among the 6,725 US facilities with a penalty on record.
Penalty history · past 3 years
Mar 30, 2026
Civil money penalty
Fines imposed for noncompliance, which can be assessed per day or per instance of violation.
$9,110
Fines imposed for noncompliance, which can be assessed per day or per instance of violation.
$9,110
Jun 20, 2025
Payment denial
Serious action where Medicare and/or Medicaid temporarily stops payments for new residents until issues are fixed.
New admissions not paid
23 days
Serious action where Medicare and/or Medicaid temporarily stops payments for new residents until issues are fixed.
New admissions not paid
23 days
Oct 27, 2023
Civil money penalty
Fines imposed for noncompliance, which can be assessed per day or per instance of violation.
$17,778
Fines imposed for noncompliance, which can be assessed per day or per instance of violation.
$17,778Fine amount comparison
This facility
$26,888
Washington average
$80,436
US average
$66,281
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
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.
1
/ 5
Significantly below average
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.
10.5
Score · lower is better
↑ 27% · WA 8.2This facility: 10.5, 27% above the WA average of 8.2 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
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.
19.5
Score · lower is better
↑ 15% · WA 17.0This facility: 19.5, 15% above the WA average of 17.0 (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: 4 better, 4 worse, 3 near WA average
3 short-stay measures: 2 better, 1 worse
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
13.5%
↓ 2% · WA 13.8This facility: 13.5, 2% below the WA average of 13.8 (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 whose need for help with daily activities has increased
13.5%
↓ 2% · WA 13.8This facility: 13.5, 2% below the WA average of 13.8 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Walking ability worsened
Percent of long-stay residents whose ability to move independently worsened
24.2%
↑ 55% · WA 15.6This facility: 24.2, 55% above the WA average of 15.6 (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 whose ability to move independently worsened
24.2%
↑ 55% · WA 15.6This facility: 24.2, 55% above the WA average of 15.6 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Bowel or bladder incontinence (low-risk residents)
Percent of low risk long-stay residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
20.9%
↓ 4% · WA 21.6This facility: 20.9, 4% below the WA average of 21.6 (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 low risk long-stay residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
20.9%
↓ 4% · WA 21.6This facility: 20.9, 4% below the WA average of 21.6 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Safety & clinical stability
Urinary tract infection
Percent of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection
0.6%
↓ 62% · WA 1.7This facility: 0.6, 62% below the WA average of 1.7 (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 with a urinary tract infection
0.6%
↓ 62% · WA 1.7This facility: 0.6, 62% below the WA average of 1.7 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Falls with major injury
Percent of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
1.2%
↓ 53% · WA 2.6This facility: 1.2, 53% 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
1.2%
↓ 53% · WA 2.6This facility: 1.2, 53% 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
6.3%
↑ 45% · WA 4.4This facility: 6.3, 45% above the WA average of 4.4 (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
6.3%
↑ 45% · WA 4.4This facility: 6.3, 45% above the WA average of 4.4 (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
7.0%
↑ 25% · WA 5.6This facility: 7.0, 25% above the WA average of 5.6 (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 who lose too much weight
7.0%
↑ 25% · WA 5.6This facility: 7.0, 25% above the WA average of 5.6 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Depressive symptoms
Percent of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms
4.6%
↓ 74% · WA 17.9This facility: 4.6, 74% below the WA average of 17.9 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms
4.6%
↓ 74% · WA 17.9This facility: 4.6, 74% below the WA average of 17.9 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Antipsychotic use
Percent of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
23.7%
↑ 58% · WA 15.0This facility: 23.7, 58% above the WA average of 15.0 (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 who received an antipsychotic medication
23.7%
↑ 58% · WA 15.0This facility: 23.7, 58% above the WA average of 15.0 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Preventive care
Pneumococcal vaccine
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
100.0%
↑ 4% · WA 96.2This facility: 100.0, 4% above the WA average of 96.2 (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 assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
100.0%
↑ 4% · WA 96.2This facility: 100.0, 4% above the WA average of 96.2 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Flu vaccine
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
100.0%
↑ 6% · WA 94.3This facility: 100.0, 6% above the WA average of 94.3 (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 residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
100.0%
↑ 6% · WA 94.3This facility: 100.0, 6% above the WA average of 94.3 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Short-stay residents
Rehab and recovery after a hospital stay · 3 measures
Physical & mental health
New antipsychotic medication
Percent of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication
5.0%
↑ 291% · WA 1.3This facility: 5.0, 291% above 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
5.0%
↑ 291% · WA 1.3This facility: 5.0, 291% above 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
99.5%
↑ 12% · WA 88.7This facility: 99.5, 12% above the WA average of 88.7 (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 short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
99.5%
↑ 12% · WA 88.7This facility: 99.5, 12% above the WA average of 88.7 (among WA facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Flu vaccine
Percent of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
90.9%
↑ 8% · WA 84.4This facility: 90.9, 8% above the WA average of 84.4 (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
90.9%
↑ 8% · WA 84.4This facility: 90.9, 8% above the WA average of 84.4 (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. 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.
Woodland Assisted Living’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, but less than last year
−0.1% operating margin
+7.3 pts vs prior year
An operating loss in 7 of the last 8 reported years. Other income ($0.0M) turns it into a net profit to $0.0M. Watch for cost-cutting that reaches staffing.
Does it invest in staff?
Spends more on payroll than most Washington homes
69.4% payroll share of revenue
WA average 64.4%Rank #10 / 60Payroll % of net patient revenue — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 10th 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 $0.9M while revenue rose $1.0M. 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. | $6.9M | +$1.0M | Trend 20172024 | WA median $13.7M | Rank in WA Rank #53 / 60Net patient revenue — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 53rd 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 12% of homes | Below WA median Higher net patient revenue than 12% 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. | $6.9M | +$0.6M | Trend 20172024 | WA median $14.1M | Rank in WA Rank #54 / 60Operating expenses — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 54th out of 60 nursing homes we track in Washington for operating expenses. Shows everything it cost to run the home — staff, supplies, rent, admin — compared with other Washington homes reporting a recent fiscal year. Expenses in dollars mostly follow how big a home is, so this compares size, not efficiency; read it next to operating margin. 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 10% of homes | 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. | −$0.0M | +$0.4M | Trend 20172024 | WA median −$0.2M | Rank in WA Rank #23 / 60Net patient income — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 23rd out of 60 nursing homes we track in Washington for net patient income. Shows net patient revenue minus operating expenses, compared with other Washington homes reporting a recent fiscal year. Homes that lost money on care are in the pool too, so a rank in the bottom half usually means a loss. 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 63% of homes | Loss, narrowing Resident care lost money this year, less than in the prior report. |
| Operating margin Net patient income as a share of revenue. The clearest health signal. | −0.1% | +7.3 pts | Trend 20172024 | WA median −1.7% | Rank in WA Rank #23 / 60Operating margin — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 23rd out of 60 nursing homes we track in Washington for operating margin. Shows net patient income as a share of net patient revenue, compared with other Washington homes reporting a recent fiscal year. Unlike the dollar figures it does not follow size, so it is the fairest comparison of financial health between a small home and a large one. 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 63% of homes | Loss A negative margin means resident care costs more than it earns. |
| Other income Money not from resident care: investments, grants, services. | $0.0M | — | Trend — | WA median $0.0M | Rank in WA Rank #29 / 58Other income — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 29th out of 58 nursing homes we track in Washington for other income. Shows income from outside resident care — investments, grants, rentals, services — compared with other Washington homes reporting a recent fiscal year. It is not part of net patient revenue; a high rank here can offset a loss on care. 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 51% of homes | 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. | $0.0M | −$1.2M | Trend — | WA median −$0.0M | Rank in WA Rank #29 / 60Net income — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 29th out of 60 nursing homes we track in Washington for net income. Shows the bottom line after other income, compared with other Washington homes reporting a recent fiscal year. Homes with a net loss are in the pool too, so a rank in the bottom half usually means a loss. 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 53% of homes | Profit The bottom line is above zero after other income. |
Staffing spend
Spends more of revenue on staff than most 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. | $4.8M | +$0.9M | Trend 20172024 | WA median $8.4M | Rank in WA Rank #52 / 60Payroll costs — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 52nd 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 14% of homes | Below WA median Higher payroll than 14% 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. | 69.4% | +4.0 pts | Trend 20172024 | WA median 58.9% | Rank in WA Rank #10 / 60Payroll % of net patient revenue — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 10th 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 85% of homes | 5.0 pts over 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 | $4.4M | $4.7M | $5.7M | $5.4M | $4.9M | $4.2M | $5.9M | $6.9M |
| Operating expenses | $4.7M | $5.0M | $5.5M | $5.6M | $5.4M | $4.9M | $6.4M | $6.9M |
| Net patient income | −$0.3M | −$0.3M | $0.2M | −$0.3M | −$0.4M | −$0.7M | −$0.4M | −$0.0M |
| Operating margin | −6.6% | −6.0% | 3.6% | −5.1% | −8.9% | −15.8% | −7.4% | −0.1% |
| Net income | −$0.2M | −$0.2M | $0.3M | $0.3M | $0.4M | −$0.5M | $1.2M | $0.0M |
| Payroll costs | $2.6M | $2.7M | $3.1M | $3.4M | $3.3M | $2.8M | $3.9M | $4.8M |
| Payroll share of revenue | 60.1% | 56.3% | 53.5% | 63.9% | 66.6% | 66.9% | 65.4% | 69.4% |
| Beds | 62 | 62 | 62 | 62 | 62 | 62 | 62 | 62 |
| Gross revenue | $5.3M | $5.4M | $6.1M | $5.2M | $4.9M | $4.2M | $6.0M | $6.9M |
| Salaries | $2.2M | $2.2M | $2.6M | $2.9M | $2.8M | $2.4M | $3.3M | $4.1M |
| Wage-related costs | $0.4M | $0.4M | $0.5M | $0.5M | $0.5M | $0.4M | $0.5M | $0.7M |
| Contract labor | $0.2M | $0.4M | $0.5M | $0.2M | $0.3M | $0.5M | $0.6M | $0.2M |
| Other operating costs | $2.1M | $2.3M | $2.5M | $2.2M | $2.1M | $2.0M | $2.5M | $2.1M |
| Net patient revenue per day | $235 | $254 | $280 | $291 | $298 | $327 | $342 | $375 |
| Cost per day | $251 | $270 | $270 | $306 | $325 | $379 | $368 | $375 |
| Average length of stay | 113.6 days | 104.9 days | 118.3 days | 204.9 days | 194.2 days | 228.4 days | 145.1 days | 119.4 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), Sep 2026
Arriving
157 admissions · FY2024
Residents admitted during the year.
Medicare
19 · 12%
Medicaid
36 · 23%
Private pay & other
102 · 65%
Resident snapshot
49 residents · Sep 2026
Residents counted on the date of the latest CMS report, which updates quarterly.
Medicare
4 · 8%
Medicaid
32 · 65%
Private pay & other
13 · 27%
Leaving
155 discharges · FY2024
Residents discharged during the year.
Medicare
9 · 6%
Medicaid
43 · 28%
Private pay & other
103 · 66%
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 Woodland Assisted Living
0.0 miles from city center
Estimated distance in miles from Woodland's city center to Woodland Assisted Living's address, calculated via Google Maps.
Calculate Travel Distance to Woodland Assisted Living
Add your location
Compare Nursing Homes around the area
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
AL (Assisted Living):
Housing with help for daily activities like bathing, dressing, and medication, without 24-hour skilled nursing.
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.
RC (Respite Care):
Short-term temporary care that gives family caregivers a break.
IL (Independent Living):
Community living with dining, activities, and transportation for active seniors who need little personal care.
HOS (Hospice Care):
Comfort-focused care for those with a terminal illness, prioritizing quality of life over treatment.
PC (Palliative Care):
Comfort-focused care for serious illness at any stage, including alongside curative treatment.
|
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.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prestige Post-Acute and Rehab Center – Centralia | NH AL IL MC | Centralia | 128
Facility
128
WA AVG
103
Rank
#15 / 69 | A |
74.3%
Facility
74.3%
WA AVG
77.5%
Rank
#33 / 56 | -4% | 4.26
Facility
4.26
WA AVG
4.41
Rank
#22 / 59 | -46% | -3% | $8.3k
Facility
$8.3k
WA AVG
$82.6k
Rank
#25 / 61 | 45
Facility
45
WA AVG
49.9
Rank
#26 / 61 | 2.7
Facility
2.7
WA AVG
6.2
Rank
#1 / 61 | 1 | 95 | A+ |
9
Facility
9
WA AVG
51
Rank
#79 / 80 | - | $13.8MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$13.8MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$16.6M
Rank
#30 / 60 | $7.4MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$7.4MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$10.1M
Rank
#39 / 60 | 53.5%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
53.5%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
64.4%
Rank
#46 / 60 | 505373 | ||||
| Timber Ridge | NH AL IL MC SNF | Issaquah (Talus) | 71
Facility
71
WA AVG
103
Rank
#54 / 69 | A | - | - | 5.93
Facility
5.93
WA AVG
4.41
Rank
#4 / 59 | -6% | +34% | $0
Facility
$0
WA AVG
$82.6k
Rank
#1 / 61 | 19
Facility
19
WA AVG
49.9
Rank
#2 / 61 | 6.3
Facility
6.3
WA AVG
6.2
Rank
#34 / 61 | - | 43 | A+ |
19
Facility
19
WA AVG
51
Rank
#70 / 80 | Lcs Timber Ridge LLC | $33.6MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$33.6MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$16.6M
Rank
#5 / 60 | $16.1MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$16.1MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$10.1M
Rank
#8 / 60 | 47.9%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
47.9%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
64.4%
Rank
#57 / 60 | 505518 | ||||
| Emerald Heights | NH AL IL MC SNF | Ne Redmond | 135
Facility
135
WA AVG
103
Rank
#12 / 69 | A |
67.6%
Facility
67.6%
WA AVG
77.5%
Rank
#44 / 56 | -13% | 5.28
Facility
5.28
WA AVG
4.41
Rank
#6 / 59 | +22% | +20% | $39.5k
Facility
$39.5k
WA AVG
$82.6k
Rank
#40 / 61 | 44
Facility
44
WA AVG
49.9
Rank
#28 / 61 | 6.3
Facility
6.3
WA AVG
6.2
Rank
#35 / 61 | 2 | 50 | - |
83
Facility
83
WA AVG
51
Rank
#8 / 80 | Craig Comfort | $43.3MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$43.3MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$16.6M
Rank
#3 / 60 | $14.8MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$14.8MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$10.1M
Rank
#12 / 60 | 34.2%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
34.2%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
64.4%
Rank
#60 / 60 | 505478 | ||||
| Washington Odd Fellows Home | NH AL SNF | Walla Walla | 124
Facility
124
WA AVG
103
Rank
#19 / 69 | B |
71.8%
Facility
71.8%
WA AVG
77.5%
Rank
#36 / 56 | -7% | 4.01
Facility
4.01
WA AVG
4.41
Rank
#40 / 59 | -14% | -9% | $67.6k
Facility
$67.6k
WA AVG
$82.6k
Rank
#48 / 61 | 54
Facility
54
WA AVG
49.9
Rank
#35 / 61 | 6.8
Facility
6.8
WA AVG
6.2
Rank
#45 / 61 | 3 | 51 | - |
67
Facility
67
WA AVG
51
Rank
#21 / 80 | Washington Odd Fellows Home | $12.5MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$12.5MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$16.6M
Rank
#37 / 60 | $7.3MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$7.3MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$10.1M
Rank
#40 / 60 | 58.1%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
58.1%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
64.4%
Rank
#33 / 60 | 505421 | ||||
| Woodland Assisted Living | NH AL HOS IL PC RC SNF | Woodland | 94
Facility
94
WA AVG
103
Rank
#45 / 69 | B | - | - | 3.49
Facility
3.49
WA AVG
4.41
Rank
#53 / 59 | -40% | -21% | $26.9k
Facility
$26.9k
WA AVG
$82.6k
Rank
#37 / 61 | 33
Facility
33
WA AVG
49.9
Rank
#6 / 61 | 4.7
Facility
4.7
WA AVG
6.2
Rank
#3 / 61 | 2 | 40 | A+ |
62
Facility
62
WA AVG
51
Rank
#26 / 80 | Caroline Settlemier | $6.9MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$6.9MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$16.6M
Rank
#53 / 60 | $4.8MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$4.8MFiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
$10.1M
Rank
#52 / 60 | 69.4%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
69.4%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
WA AVG
64.4%
Rank
#10 / 60 | 505232 |
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 5 on this page. See how we rank facilities
Know before you visit
Frequently Asked Questions about Woodland Assisted Living
Quick answers from public records and the community's own listing.01 Is Woodland Assisted Living in a walkable area?
Woodland Assisted Living has a walk score of 62. Somewhat walkable. Some errands can be accomplished on foot, with a mix of nearby amenities.
02 What is the license number of Woodland Assisted Living?
According to WA state health department records, Woodland Assisted Living's license number is 1028.
03 What is the occupancy rate at Woodland Assisted Living?
Woodland Assisted Living's occupancy is 81.6%.
04 How long has Woodland Assisted Living been in business?
Woodland Assisted Living has been operating for approximately 32 years, based on available licensing and registration records.
05 Are pets allowed at Woodland Assisted Living?
No, Woodland Assisted Living has a no-pet policy.
06 What is the best email address for Woodland Assisted Living?
The team at Woodland Assisted Living can be reached at Justin@woodlandcarecenter.com.
07 Does Woodland Assisted Living operate as a for-profit or non-profit?
Woodland Assisted Living is registered as a for-profit in WA.
Updated on
