How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Fircrest Nursing Facility
15230-15th Northeast, Seattle, WA 98155 (opens Google Maps) · King County · (206) 361-3511· 110 certified beds · avg 86 residents/day · certified since May 13, 1994 · Medicaid only — not Medicare certified
Certified for Medicaid only. It cannot bill Medicare, so a short post-hospital rehabilitation stay would not be covered the usual way here. Who pays for nursing home care →
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Nov 7, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
8.72
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · how star ratings work →
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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 36 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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). F-0628
The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. F-0641
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
View all 36 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Nov 7, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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). · F-0628 |
| Nov 7, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Nov 7, 2025 | 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 |
| Nov 7, 2025 | 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 |
| Nov 7, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552 |
| Nov 7, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0656 |
| Nov 7, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0695 |
| Aug 20, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Aug 20, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842 |
| May 19, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0609 |
| May 6, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Feb 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · from a complaint · F-0552 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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. · F-0732 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0656 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0761 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | 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 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | 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 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0636 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0637 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0688 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | 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 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0693 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0695 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Nov 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
| Oct 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0609 |
| Oct 20, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Aug 7, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Aug 7, 2023 | 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 |
| Aug 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0656 |
| Aug 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0693 |
| Aug 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0695 |
| Aug 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (16 → 7).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 17
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 12
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 7 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 17 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 12 | 0 | E |
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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityWashington averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 8.72
Washington average: 4.24
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.60
Washington average: 0.91
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 8.26
Washington average: 3.69
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Washington avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 8.72 | 4.24 | 3.95 | top 2% in Washington; top 1% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.60 | 0.91 | 0.69 | bottom 13% in Washington; top 48% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 8.26 | 3.69 | 3.50 | top 2% in Washington; top 1% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.51 | 0.67 | 0.48 | bottom 31% in Washington; top 31% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 50.5 | 45.1 | 45.8 | bottom 36% in Washington; bottom 36% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 53.3 | 45.4 | 42.9 | bottom 33% in Washington; bottom 31% 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 9.32, RN 0.64, weekend 8.82.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (9.32 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.
Quality measures rating: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Fircrest Nursing Facility. 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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
Who owns this facility
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
Government - State
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
All 1 owning or managing party CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
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 written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "How do you explain health changes and treatment options to residents and their families?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 51% 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?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 46 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shoreline Health and Rehabilitation | 2.1 mi | Seattle, WA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Avamere Rehabilitation of Shoreline | 2.2 mi | Seattle, WA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Bridges to Home | 2.3 mi | Shoreline, WA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Bothell Health Care | 3.0 mi | Bothell, WA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Edmonds Post Acute | 3.4 mi | Edmonds, WA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Cascades of St Anne | 3.8 mi | Seattle, WA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Pine Ridge Post Acute | 3.9 mi | Edmonds, WA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Richmond Beach Rehab | 4.2 mi | Shoreline, WA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Broadview Center | 4.2 mi | Seattle, WA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Alderwood Post Acute & Rehabilitation | 4.5 mi | Lynnwood, WA | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Lynnwood Post Acute Rehabilitation Center | 4.6 mi | Lynnwood, WA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Life Care Center of Kirkland | 5.3 mi | Kirkland, WA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in King, WA — 47 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Garden Terrace Healthcare Center of Federal Way — Federal Way, WA · overall 5/5
- Hallmark Manor — Federal Way, WA · overall 2/5
- Judson Park Health Center — Des Moines, WA · overall 5/5
- Kin on Health Care Center — Seattle, WA · overall 2/5
- Lea Hill Rehabilitation and Care Center — Auburn, WA · overall 4/5
- Life Care Center of Federal Way — Federal Way, WA · overall 2/5
- Marianwood Health and Rehabilitation — Issaquah, WA · overall 3/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 50A260.