OregonGresham

Regency Gresham Nursing & Rehabilitation Center

5905 SE Powell Valley Rd, Gresham, OR 97080 · Multnomah County · 128 certified beds · avg 90 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1967

Part of chain: REGENCY PACIFIC MANAGEMENT (27 facilities, chain avg rating 3.9★)

4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.56
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5

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.

All citations in the current public record (21)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Sep 19, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Sep 19, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Sep 19, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 19, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide care that took into account residents' past trauma or their cultural backgrounds. Care is supposed to be sensitive to what residents have lived through and where they come from.
Sep 19, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 19, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jul 1, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman.
Jul 1, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Jul 1, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jul 1, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · from a complaint
Jul 1, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · from a complaint
Jul 1, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jul 1, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 21, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care.
Apr 21, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 21, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups.
Apr 21, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Apr 21, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 21, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Apr 21, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 21, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (7 → 6).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202380E
202470E
202560E

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)

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

MeasureThis facilityOregon avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)5.565.423.95top 34% in Oregon; top 7% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.710.780.69top 46% in Oregon; top 36% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing5.054.853.50top 30% in Oregon; top 6% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.580.480.48top 23% in Oregon; top 24% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)29.747.445.8top 6% in Oregon; top 14% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)33.351.642.9top 21% in Oregon; top 33% 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 5.39, RN 0.69, weekend 4.90. 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Stroud, DavidIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest33%04/23/2007
Beddoe, MarvinIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/23/2007
Beddoe, MarvinIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/23/2007
Beddoe, SandraIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2001
Beddoe, SandraIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2001
Clay, JamesIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2007
Dunham, SarahIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2022
Dunham, SarahIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2022
Knippers, AnthonyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/16/2018
Knippers, AnthonyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/16/2018
Omnicare LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2013
Rapp, AndrewIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/08/2016
Rapp, AndrewIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/08/2016
Regency Pacific Management LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2010
Regency Pacific Management LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/26/2025
Stroud, DavidIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2007

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Fairlawn Health and Rehabilitation of Cascadia1.9 miGresham, OR★★★★★4/5
Gresham Post Acute Care and Rehabilitation3.0 miGresham, OR★★☆☆☆2/5
Village Manor of Cascadia4.2 miWood Village, OR★★★★☆3/5
Marquis Centennial Post Acute Rehab4.8 miPortland, OR★★★★★4/5
Village Health Care5.3 miGresham, OR★★☆☆☆2/5
Lacamas Creek Post Acute7.2 miCamas, WA★★★★★5/5
Cedar Crossings7.3 miPortland, OR★★★☆☆2/5
Avalon Care Center - Portland7.8 miPortland, OR★★★☆☆2/5abuse
Cascade Terrace Post Acute8.3 miPortland, OR★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
Portland Health and Rehabilitation8.5 miPortland, OR★☆☆☆☆1/5
Menlo Park Post Acute8.7 miPortland, OR★★☆☆☆2/5
Secora Rehabilitation of Cascadia9.2 miPortland, OR★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Gresham →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 385015.