Corwin Center at Emerald Heights
10901 - 176th Circle Northeast, Redmond, WA 98052 · King County · 61 certified beds · avg 50 residents/day · certified since Dec 8, 1992
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
2
Serious findings on record
$39,468
Fines, last 3 years
5.46
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5
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 · Apr 11, 2025 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
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: May 2, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Dec 15, 2023 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
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: Jan 8, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (45)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 23, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. |
| Apr 23, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Apr 23, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint |
| Apr 23, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Apr 23, 2025 | 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. |
| Apr 23, 2025 | 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. |
| Apr 23, 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. |
| Apr 23, 2025 | 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. |
| Apr 23, 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. |
| Apr 23, 2025 | 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. |
| Apr 23, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. |
| Apr 23, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not regularly inspect bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails for safety, or the rails and mattresses were not attached safely to the frames. |
| Apr 11, 2025 | ▲ 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. · from a complaint |
| Apr 11, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. · from a complaint |
| Feb 28, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Feb 14, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint |
| Feb 14, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 5, 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. |
| Apr 5, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · from a complaint |
| Apr 5, 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. · from a complaint |
| Apr 5, 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. |
| Apr 5, 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. |
| Apr 5, 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 |
| Apr 5, 2024 | 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. |
| Apr 5, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. |
| Apr 5, 2024 | 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. |
| Apr 5, 2024 | 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. |
| Apr 5, 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. · from a complaint |
| Apr 5, 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. |
| Apr 5, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. |
| Apr 5, 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. |
| Apr 5, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · from a complaint |
| Dec 15, 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. · from a complaint |
| Dec 15, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide or arrange specialized rehabilitation services — such as physical, occupational, or speech therapy — for residents who needed them. · from a complaint |
| Dec 15, 2023 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Jan 4, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | 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. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. |
| Jan 4, 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. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | 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. |
| Jan 4, 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. |
| Jan 4, 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. |
| Jan 4, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (15 → 12).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 13 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 15 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 17 | 1 | G ▲ |
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 $39,468.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 11, 2025 | Fine | $39,468 |
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) | 5.46 | 4.24 | 3.95 | top 5% in Washington; top 8% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.25 | 0.91 | 0.69 | top 11% in Washington; top 8% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.63 | 3.69 | 3.50 | top 8% in Washington; top 10% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.94 | 0.67 | 0.48 | top 13% in Washington; top 7% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 34.2 | 45.1 | 45.8 | top 19% in Washington; top 22% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 52.9 | 45.4 | 42.9 | bottom 36% in Washington; bottom 31% 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 4.94, RN 1.13, weekend 4.19. 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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Who owns this facility
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bloodworth, Jamilyn | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2023 |
| Bloodworth, Jamilyn | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2023 |
| Comfort, Craig | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/04/2016 |
| Comfort, Craig | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/04/2016 |
| Taleghani, Masoud | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2024 |
| Taleghani, Masoud | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2024 |
| Weisner, Corey | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/14/2024 |
| Weisner, Corey | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/14/2024 |
| Wood, Michelle | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/17/2023 |
| Wood, Michelle | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/17/2023 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "How do you screen new residents for mental health and disability-related needs, and how do you provide the specialized services they require?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redmond Care and Rehabilitation Center | 2.1 mi | Redmond, WA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Bellevue Post Acute | 4.6 mi | Bellevue, WA | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Life Care Center of Kirkland | 4.7 mi | Kirkland, WA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Cascades of St Anne | 8.4 mi | Seattle, WA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Bothell Health Care | 8.9 mi | Bothell, WA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Park Shore | 9.0 mi | Seattle, WA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Marianwood Health and Rehabilitation | 9.0 mi | Issaquah, WA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Shoreline Health and Rehabilitation | 9.2 mi | Seattle, WA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Covenant Shores Health Center | 9.3 mi | Mercer Island, WA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Fircrest Nursing Facility | 9.5 mi | Seattle, WA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 505478.