1685 Eaton St, Lakewood, CO 80214 (opens Google Maps) · Jefferson County · (303) 232-4405· 110 certified beds · avg 93 residents/day · certified since Dec 1, 1991 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 2, 2024
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Apr 2, 2024
$8,151
Fines, last 3 years
3.27
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
⚠ The most recent standard health inspection was more than 2 years ago — conditions may have changed.
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 quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 2, 2024 · F-0622 · triggered by a complaint
The facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out.
Why it matters: Improper discharge or transfer can suddenly uproot a resident from their home and care without warning or recourse.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Apr 3, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 17 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaintF-0600
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaintF-0600
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · from a complaintF-0698
View all 17 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
Date
Severity
What the facility was cited for
Jun 11, 2026
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600
Jun 17, 2025
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600
Feb 12, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · from a complaint · F-0698
Aug 21, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving. · from a complaint · F-0660
Apr 2, 2024
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. · from a complaint · F-0622
Apr 2, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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. · from a complaint · F-0623
Apr 2, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide basic life support, such as CPR, before emergency medical help arrived — care that's required when it matches the doctor's orders and the resident's own written wishes. · F-0678
Apr 2, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. · F-0685
Apr 2, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care. · F-0791
Dec 15, 2022
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide appropriate treatment and services to residents with a mental health condition, difficulty adjusting emotionally, or a history of trauma or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). · F-0742
Dec 15, 2022
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Dec 15, 2022
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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. · F-0812
Dec 15, 2022
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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. · F-0880
Dec 15, 2022
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving. · F-0660
Dec 15, 2022
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Aug 24, 2021
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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. · F-0550
Aug 24, 2021
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (6 → 5).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations:
2
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2022
All citations:
6
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2024
All citations:
6
Serious citations (G–L):
1
2025
All citations:
2
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2026
All citations:
1
Serious citations (G–L):
0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2021
2
0
E
2022
6
0
E
2024
6
1
G ▲
2025
2
0
E
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.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
Date
Type
Amount / length
Apr 2, 2024
Fine
$8,151
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityColorado averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
3.27
Colorado average:
3.89
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.83
Colorado average:
0.86
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
3.08
Colorado average:
3.44
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
Colorado avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
3.27
3.89
3.95
bottom 21% in Colorado; bottom 25% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.83
0.86
0.69
top 46% in Colorado; top 25% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
3.08
3.44
3.50
bottom 36% in Colorado; bottom 35% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.58
0.61
0.48
top 41% in Colorado; top 25% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
32.8
47.1
45.8
top 16% in Colorado; top 19% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
25.0
44.6
42.9
top 14% in Colorado; top 20% in the U.S.
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — 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 2.90, RN 0.74, weekend 2.73.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (2.90 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Cambridge Care Center. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
CMS records place this facility in Jefferson, CO — 23 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 065296.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
The Care File
Visit checklist — Cambridge Care Center
1685 Eaton St, Lakewood, CO 80214 · (303) 232-4405
Health inspection rating 2/5 · CMS overall 3/5 · ▲ FEDERAL ABUSE CITATION FLAG· Fines (3y): $8,151
Most serious findings on record:
▲ Apr 2, 2024 (F-0622, Actual harm, isolated): The facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out.
Questions for the administrator:
☐ "Under what circumstances would you discharge or transfer a resident, and what notice and appeal rights would we have?"
☐ "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
☐ "How do you coordinate and monitor care for residents who receive dialysis?"
☐ "How do you prepare residents and families for discharge, and what support do you arrange for after they leave?"
☐ "If you ever planned to discharge or transfer my family member, how much written notice would we receive and how could we appeal?"
☐ "Are staff on every shift trained and certified in CPR, and how do they know each resident's resuscitation wishes?"
☐ "How do you arrange eye and hearing care for residents, including appointments and equipment like glasses or hearing aids?"
☐ "How do residents get dental care here — is there a dentist who visits, and how are appointments arranged?"
☐ "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Colorado midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
☐ "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
☐ "CMS reports 33% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
☐ "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
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 065296 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)