Columbia Basin Care Facility
1015 Webber Street, The Dalles, OR 97058 · Wasco County · 90 certified beds · avg 41 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1967
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5
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)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, repeated · Feb 2, 2026 · F-0880
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.
Why it matters: Weak infection control lets illnesses like flu, COVID-19, and drug-resistant infections spread quickly among vulnerable residents.
Severity (K): A life-threatening or extremely dangerous situation affected several residents. Among the most serious findings an inspection can produce.
Corrected: Feb 2, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Feb 2, 2026 · F-0691
The facility did not provide proper care for residents with a colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy — surgical openings in the abdomen that let waste leave the body into a pouch. These require regular, skilled attention to stay clean and healthy.
Why it matters: Poor ostomy care leads to skin breakdown, infection, pain, and embarrassment for the resident.
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: Feb 10, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · May 8, 2023 · F-0689
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
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: Jun 27, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (35)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 2, 2026 | ▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, repeated | 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. |
| Feb 2, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not provide proper care for residents with a colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy — surgical openings in the abdomen that let waste leave the body into a pouch. These require regular, skilled attention to stay clean and healthy. |
| Feb 2, 2026 | 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. |
| Feb 2, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint |
| Feb 2, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. |
| Feb 2, 2026 | 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. |
| Feb 2, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Feb 2, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. |
| Aug 30, 2024 | 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. |
| Aug 30, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not make sure the resident's doctor reviewed their care and wrote, signed, and dated progress notes and orders at each required visit. |
| Aug 30, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Aug 30, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Aug 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. |
| Aug 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Aug 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way. |
| Aug 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. |
| Aug 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Aug 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. |
| Aug 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Aug 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. |
| Aug 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make sure residents actually saw their doctor face-to-face at all required visits. Doctors must examine nursing home residents in person on a regular schedule. |
| Aug 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. |
| Aug 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. |
| Aug 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. |
| May 8, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| May 8, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| May 8, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not fully assess residents on time — a complete assessment of health, abilities, and needs is required when a resident is first admitted and at least once every 12 months after that. |
| May 8, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| May 8, 2023 | 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. |
| May 8, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. |
| May 8, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| May 8, 2023 | D · Potential for 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. |
| May 8, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. |
| May 8, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. |
| May 8, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (15 → 8).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 11 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 16 | 0 | F |
| 2026 | 8 | 2 | K ▲ |
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)
1 fine totaling $52,030.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 2, 2026 | Fine | $52,030 |
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | Oregon avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.45 | 5.42 | 3.95 | bottom 6% in Oregon; top 24% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.83 | 0.78 | 0.69 | top 31% in Oregon; top 25% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.86 | 4.85 | 3.50 | bottom 2% in Oregon; top 27% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.42 | 0.48 | 0.48 | top 42% in Oregon; top 46% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 68.2 | 47.4 | 45.8 | bottom 6% in Oregon; bottom 7% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 50.0 | 51.6 | 42.9 | top 40% in Oregon; bottom 39% 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 4.13, RN 0.77, weekend 3.59. Staffing rating: 1/5.
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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Who owns this facility
Government - City/county
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wasco County Nursing Care, INC. | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 03/11/1997 |
| Courtney, David | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/11/1997 |
| Olmstead, Aubree | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/13/2016 |
| Omeg, Linda | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/11/1997 |
| Snyder, Kimberly | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2015 |
| Trautz, Linda | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2018 |
| Wasco County Nursing Care, INC. | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/1997 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Which staff are trained in ostomy care, and how often is that care provided and checked?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Is signing an arbitration agreement required for admission, and can we refuse it without affecting my family member's care?"
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
- "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "How do you decide when a feeding tube is truly needed, and how do staff care for residents who have one?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Dalles Health and Rehabilitation | 0.9 mi | The Dalles, OR | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Oregon Veterans Home | 3.9 mi | The Dalles, OR | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Hood River Post Acute | 17.1 mi | Hood River, OR | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
All facilities in The Dalles →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 385049.