Avamere Rehabilitation of Cascade Park

Name: Avamere Rehabilitation of Cascade Park
Address: 801 SOUTHEAST PARK CREST AVENUE, Vancouver, WA, 98683, US
Telephone: 3602602200

801 Southeast Park Crest Avenue, Vancouver, WA 98683 · Clark County · 88 certified beds · avg 82 residents/day · certified since Sep 1, 1991

Part of chain: AVAMERE (27 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)

4/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

Fines, last 3 years

5.05

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5

The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Aug 9, 2024 · F-0686

The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.

Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Sep 11, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (32)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

Date	Severity	What the facility was cited for
Mar 4, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · from a complaint
Dec 3, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint
Nov 21, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment.
Nov 21, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines.
Nov 21, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have.
Nov 21, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Nov 21, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason.
Nov 21, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Nov 21, 2025	C · Minimal risk, facility-wide	The facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day.
Oct 7, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · from a complaint
Aug 9, 2024	▲ G · Actual harm, one-off	The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.
Aug 9, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment.
Aug 9, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights.
Aug 9, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences.
Aug 9, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care.
Aug 9, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly.
Aug 9, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave.
Aug 9, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines.
Aug 9, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Aug 9, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Oct 10, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · from a complaint
Sep 22, 2023	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Sep 22, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences.
Sep 22, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not give residents the required written notice of their rights, the facility's rules, the services offered, and what those services cost.
Sep 22, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not give residents important notices in a format and language they can understand — for example, translated documents or accessible formats for those with vision or hearing loss.
Sep 22, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman.
Sep 22, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician.
Sep 22, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not serve meals and snacks at times that fit residents' needs, preferences, and requests, or did not offer nourishing alternatives for residents who want to eat outside scheduled meal times.
Sep 22, 2023	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign.
Sep 22, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care.
Sep 22, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal.
Sep 22, 2023	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (10 → 7).

Year	Citations	Serious (G–L)	Worst severity that year
2023	12	0	F
2024	11	1	G ▲
2025	8	0	D
2026	1	0	D

Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.

Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

Measure	This facility	Washington avg	U.S. avg	Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)	5.05	4.24	3.95	top 9% in Washington; top 12% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	1.22	0.91	0.69	top 15% in Washington; top 9% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	4.55	3.69	3.50	top 9% in Washington; top 11% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.74	0.67	0.48	top 32% in Washington; top 14% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	27.4	45.1	45.8	top 6% in Washington; top 10% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	30.0	45.4	42.9	top 20% in Washington; top 29% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 4.76, RN 1.15, weekend 4.29. Staffing rating: 5/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Kofstad, Mary	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	02/13/2024
Morris, Christopher	Individual	Contracted Managing Employee	NOT APPLICABLE	09/01/2016
Rose, Ryan	Individual	W-2 Managing Employee	NOT APPLICABLE	08/22/2024
Simpson, Andrew	Individual	Corporate Officer	NOT APPLICABLE	06/01/2024

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

"How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
"What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
"Before a resident is discharged or transferred, how do you make sure the new place can actually meet their needs?"
"What is your policy on physical restraints, and what alternatives do you try first?"
"Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
"How do you help residents maintain their daily living skills, and how do you measure whether it's working?"
"How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
"How often is each resident's medication list reviewed, and who decides when a drug can be reduced or stopped?"
"What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
"Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

Facility	Distance	City	Overall	Inspection	Flags
Hudson Bay Health and Rehabilitation	3.5 mi	Vancouver, WA	★★★★★	5/5
Vancouver Specialty and Rehab Care	3.5 mi	Vancouver, WA	★★★★☆	4/5
Evergreen Post Acute	5.1 mi	Portland, OR	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Lacamas Creek Post Acute	5.6 mi	Camas, WA	★★★★★	5/5
Rose City Nursing and Rehabilitation	5.8 mi	Portland, OR	★★★☆☆	3/5
Porthaven Post Acute	6.0 mi	Portland, OR	★★★☆☆	2/5
Menlo Park Post Acute	6.1 mi	Portland, OR	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Fernhill Rehabilitation and Care	6.4 mi	Portland, OR	★★☆☆☆	2/5	abuse
Glisan Post Acute	6.5 mi	Portland, OR	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Gateway Care and Retirement	6.7 mi	Portland, OR	★★★☆☆	3/5
Portland Health and Rehabilitation	6.7 mi	Portland, OR	★☆☆☆☆	1/5
Village Manor of Cascadia	7.2 mi	Wood Village, OR	★★★★☆	3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Vancouver →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 505389.

The Care File

Visit checklist — Avamere Rehabilitation of Cascade Park

801 Southeast Park Crest Avenue, Vancouver, WA 98683 · 3602602200

Health inspection rating 4/5 · CMS overall 5/5· Fines (3y): $0

Most serious findings on record:

▲ Aug 9, 2024 (F-0686, Actual harm, one-off): The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
☐ "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
☐ "Before a resident is discharged or transferred, how do you make sure the new place can actually meet their needs?"
☐ "What is your policy on physical restraints, and what alternatives do you try first?"
☐ "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
☐ "How do you help residents maintain their daily living skills, and how do you measure whether it's working?"
☐ "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
☐ "How often is each resident's medication list reviewed, and who decides when a drug can be reduced or stopped?"
☐ "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
☐ "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

While you're there, notice:

☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)

Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 505389 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)