How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Regency Redmond Rehabilitation and Nursing Center
3025 SW Reservoir Drive, Redmond, OR 97756 (opens Google Maps) · Deschutes County · (541) 548-5066· 50 certified beds · avg 35 residents/day · certified since Jun 25, 1992 · 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: REGENCY PACIFIC MANAGEMENT (27 facilities, chain avg rating 3.9★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 16, 2026
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Apr 7, 2023
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.28
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.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 7, 2023 · F-0658
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 7, 2023 · F-0658
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Why it matters: Care that falls below professional standards can directly harm a resident's health and recovery.
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: May 19, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 7, 2023 · F-0760
The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 7, 2023 · F-0760
The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Why it matters: A serious medication error can cause real harm, hospitalization, or worse.
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: May 19, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 30 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. F-0604
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
The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. F-0679
View all 30 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | 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 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| Jan 16, 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. · F-0689 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | 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 |
| Jan 16, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0699 |
| Aug 16, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · F-0727 |
| Aug 16, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803 |
| Aug 16, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0558 |
| Aug 16, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly. · F-0585 |
| Aug 16, 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 |
| Aug 16, 2024 | 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 16, 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 16, 2024 | 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 |
| Aug 16, 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. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Aug 16, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0699 |
| Aug 16, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0758 |
| Aug 16, 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 |
| Apr 7, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual 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 7, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760 |
| Apr 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 |
| Apr 7, 2023 | 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 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences. · F-0553 |
| Apr 7, 2023 | 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. · F-0609 |
| Apr 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · F-0610 |
| Apr 7, 2023 | 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 7, 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. · F-0684 |
| Apr 7, 2023 | 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 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · F-0730 |
| Apr 7, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (12 → 6).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 2
2024
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 6
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 | 12 | 2 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 12 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 6 | 0 | D |
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 facilityOregon averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 5.28
Oregon average: 5.42
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.36
Oregon average: 0.78
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.32
Oregon average: 4.85
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Oregon avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 5.28 | 5.42 | 3.95 | bottom 42% in Oregon; top 10% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.36 | 0.78 | 0.69 | top 7% in Oregon; top 6% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.32 | 4.85 | 3.50 | bottom 20% in Oregon; top 15% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.93 | 0.48 | 0.48 | top 6% in Oregon; top 7% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 55.6 | 47.4 | 45.8 | bottom 28% in Oregon; bottom 24% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 44.4 | 51.6 | 42.9 | top 31% in Oregon; bottom 45% 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 5.72, RN 1.48, weekend 4.69.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.72 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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: 5/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Regency Redmond Rehabilitation and Nursing Center. 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 →
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BD Facilities LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 03/01/2019 |
| BD Facilities LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/05/2025 |
| Beddoe, Marvin | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2016 |
| Beddoe, Marvin | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2016 |
| Beddoe, Sandra | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2016 |
| Omnicare LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2013 |
| Rapp, Andrew | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/08/2016 |
| Rapp, Andrew | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/08/2016 |
| Regency Pacific Management LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2010 |
| Regency Pacific Management LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/26/2025 |
| Stauffer, Gretchen | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/16/2022 |
| Stauffer, Gretchen | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/16/2022 |
| Suarez, Yolanda | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2026 |
| Suarez, Yolanda | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2026 |
All 14 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Regency Pacific Management — 27 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.
- Arlington Health and Rehabilitation — Arlington, WA · overall 4/5
- Good Samaritan Health Care Ctr — Yakima, WA · overall 5/5
- Mt Baker Care Center — Bellingham, WA · overall 5/5
- Park Rose Care Center — Tacoma, WA · overall 2/5
- Puyallup Post Acute — Puyallup, WA · overall 1/5
- Regency at Northpointe — Spokane, WA · overall 5/5
- Regency at the Park — College Place, WA · overall 5/5
- Regency Canyon Lakes Rehab and Nursing Center — Kennewick, WA · overall 5/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 26 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
- "What is your policy on physical restraints, and what alternatives do you try first?"
- "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
- "Can I see this month's activities calendar, and what do you offer residents who can't leave their rooms?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
- "How do you learn about each resident's background and history, and how does that shape their care?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Oregon midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 56% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 14 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bend Transitional Care | 13.4 mi | Bend, OR | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Pilot Butte Rehabilitation Center | 13.9 mi | Bend, OR | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Regency Care of Central Oregon | 14.9 mi | Bend, OR | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Regency Prineville Rehabilitation and Nursing Cent | 18.3 mi | Prineville, OR | ★★★★★ | 5/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 385230.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).