How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
430 Lilly Road Northeast, Olympia, WA 98506 (opens Google Maps) · Thurston County · (360) 491-9700· 113 certified beds · avg 80 residents/day · certified since Jul 7, 1976 · 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 →
Part of chain: THE ENSIGN GROUP (342 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5 · 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 22, 2024 · 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): 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: Jun 26, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 42 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. F-0561
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 provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. F-0658
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 24, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. · F-0561 |
| Apr 24, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 24, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658 |
| Apr 24, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0756 |
| Apr 24, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0757 |
| Apr 24, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 24, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function. · F-0605 |
| Apr 24, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0657 |
| Apr 24, 2026 | 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. · F-0684 |
| Apr 24, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0686 |
| Apr 24, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. · F-0687 |
| Apr 24, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Apr 24, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0881 |
| Mar 19, 2026 | 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 |
| Jan 30, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs. · from a complaint · F-0770 |
| Apr 1, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0623 |
| Apr 1, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Apr 1, 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 |
| Apr 1, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0881 |
| Apr 1, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly notify residents about the balance of money it holds for them, or failed to return those funds when a resident was discharged, evicted, or died. · F-0569 |
| Apr 1, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0657 |
| Apr 1, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658 |
| Apr 1, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | When a resident had a planned discharge, the facility did not make sure the necessary information was communicated to the resident and to the doctors or facility taking over their care. · F-0661 |
| Apr 1, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0677 |
| Apr 1, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs. · F-0770 |
| Oct 4, 2024 | 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 27, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs. · from a complaint · F-0770 |
| May 22, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| May 22, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0677 |
| Mar 25, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0691 |
| Jan 26, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658 |
| Jan 26, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · F-0694 |
| Jan 26, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759 |
| Jan 26, 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 |
| Jan 26, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Jan 26, 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 |
| Jan 26, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Jan 26, 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. · F-0623 |
| Jan 26, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0625 |
| Jan 26, 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 |
| Jan 26, 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 |
| Jan 26, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (10 → 13).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 17 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 10 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 15 | 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.
How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 4.24 | 4.24 | 3.95 | top 34% in Washington; top 31% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.61 | 0.91 | 0.69 | bottom 13% in Washington; top 47% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.78 | 3.69 | 3.50 | top 29% in Washington; top 30% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.43 | 0.67 | 0.48 | bottom 14% in Washington; top 43% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 41.7 | 45.1 | 45.8 | top 43% in Washington; top 41% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 54.5 | 45.4 | 42.9 | bottom 31% in Washington; bottom 29% 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 4.24, RN 0.61, weekend 3.78.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.24 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Olympia Transitional Care and Rehabilitation. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 →
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Actriv Healthcare LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2015 |
| Burnam, Soon | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2014 |
| CMG Cit Acquisition, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2015 |
| Denor, Joseph | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/05/2023 |
| Denor, Joseph | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/05/2023 |
| Denor, Joseph | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/05/2023 |
| Ensign Services INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2022 |
| Farnsworth, Stephen | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/09/2024 |
| Favorite Healthcare Staffing LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2015 |
| Integrated Medical Systems LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2015 |
| Keetch, Chad | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2011 |
| Lilly Road Health Holdings LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2022 |
| Port, Barry | Individual | Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/09/2025 |
| Smith, Joel | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2015 |
| Smith, Joel | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2015 |
| Smith, Joel | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2015 |
| Standard Bearer Healthcare Op LP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2022 |
| The Ensign Group INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2022 |
All 18 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
CMS lists this facility under the chain The Ensign Group — 342 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 341 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Woodard Creek Health & Rehabilitation | 0.1 mi | Olympia, WA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
| Panorama City Conv & Rehab Ctr | 1.6 mi | Lacey, WA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Regency Olympia Rehabilitation and Nursing Center | 2.5 mi | Olympia, WA | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Crystal Cove Post Acute | 2.7 mi | Lacey, WA | —/5 | SFF | |
| Lacey Post Acute & Rehabilitation | 3.6 mi | Lacey, WA | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Puget Sound Care | 5.2 mi | Olympia, WA | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| The Oaks at Lakewood | 17.4 mi | Tacoma, WA | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Fir Lane Care | 17.6 mi | Shelton, WA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Shelton Health and Rehabilitation | 17.8 mi | Shelton, WA | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Agility Health and Rehabilitation | 18.0 mi | University Place, WA | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Birch Creek Post Acute & Rehabilitation | 19.2 mi | Tacoma, WA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Orchard Park Health Care & Rehab Center | 19.5 mi | Tacoma, WA | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 505243.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details