FOREST GROVE POST ACUTE
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Forest Grove Post Acute has a Trust Grade of D, which indicates below-average quality and raises some concerns about care. It ranks #35 out of 127 facilities in Oregon, putting it in the top half, and #3 out of 9 in Washington County, meaning there are only two better local options. The facility is on an improving trend, reducing issues from 8 in 2024 to just 2 in 2025. Staffing received an average rating of 3 out of 5 stars, with a turnover rate of 33%, which is better than the state average, suggesting a stable workforce. However, it has less RN coverage than 87% of Oregon facilities, which is concerning, as RNs are crucial for spotting potential health issues. In terms of fines, the facility has no fines on record, which is a positive sign. Specific incidents noted in inspections include a critical failure to provide sufficient supervision for a resident at risk of self-harm, leading to hospitalization. Additionally, there was a serious issue where wound care was not adequately followed up for a resident, resulting in a worsening condition. While the facility has some strengths, such as good overall and health inspection star ratings, these serious findings highlight important areas for improvement in resident care.
- Trust Score
- D
- In Oregon
- #35/127
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 33% turnover. Near Oregon's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Oregon facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 21 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Oregon. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 21 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (33%)
15 points below Oregon average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
13pts below Oregon avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 21 deficiencies on record
Jul 2025
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0605
(Tag F0605)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure PRN psychotropic medication orders were discontinued after 14 days for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#20) reviewed for ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to assess residents for smoking safety and provide supervision for smoking residents for 2 of 3 sampled residen...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2024
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow physician's orders related to oxygen administration for 5 of 7 sampled residents (#s 13, 15, 16, 17 an...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2024
7 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident received pressure ulcer treatments for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#4) reviewed for pressure ulcers. This f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, it was determined the facility failed to treat residents with dignity and respect for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#32) reviewed for dignity. This placed residents a...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0582
(Tag F0582)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide a written Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice of Non-Coverage (SNF ABN) in a timely fashion for 1...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
2. Resident 56 was admitted to the facility on 3/2024 with diagnoses including hepatic encephalopathy (a decline in brain function that occurs as a result of severe liver disease).
Resident 56's Care ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure the daily staff posting was accurate for 7 out of 30 days reviewed for staffing. This placed residents, the public ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure appropriate medication storage temperatures were logged and maintained for 1 of 1 medication storage ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0730
(Tag F0730)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on Interview and record review was determined the facility failed to ensure CNAs received annual performance reviews for 5 of 5 randomly selected CNAs (#14, 18, 19, 20 and 21) reviewed for staff...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2023
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0624
(Tag F0624)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to order home health and in home care giving service ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2019
10 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Deficiency F0741
(Tag F0741)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to have sufficient staff for residents who required one to one supervision for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#11) rev...
Read full inspector narrative →
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure Staff 9 (RN), Staff 10 (LPN), Staff 17 (LPN), St...
Read full inspector narrative →
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Resident 268 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including morbid obesity and lymphedema.
The 7/6/19 admiss...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to keep a resident room in good repair for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#27) reviewed for environment. This placed residents at ris...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to c...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0742
(Tag F0742)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure behavioral health plans were revised and to ensure behavior monitoring logs were complete for 2 of 2 sampled reside...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to accurately document in the medical record for 1 of 4 sampled residents (#23) reviewed for pressure ulcers. Th...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 4. Resident 53 was admitted to the facility in 2016 with diagnoses including hemiplegia (paralysis on one side of the body).
Th...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to store and handle food in a sanitary manner and to maintain kitchen equipment in sanitary condition in 1 of 1 kitchen reviewe...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure a safe kitchen environment for residents, staff and visitors in the facility for one kitchen reviewed. This placed re...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Oregon facilities.
- • 33% turnover. Below Oregon's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s), 3 harm violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 21 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • Grade D (43/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Forest Grove Post Acute's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns FOREST GROVE POST ACUTE an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within Oregon, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Forest Grove Post Acute Staffed?
CMS rates FOREST GROVE POST ACUTE's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 33%, compared to the Oregon average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care. RN turnover specifically is 56%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Forest Grove Post Acute?
State health inspectors documented 21 deficiencies at FOREST GROVE POST ACUTE during 2019 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 3 that caused actual resident harm, and 17 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Forest Grove Post Acute?
FOREST GROVE POST ACUTE is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by PACS GROUP, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 114 certified beds and approximately 78 residents (about 68% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in FOREST GROVE, Oregon.
How Does Forest Grove Post Acute Compare to Other Oregon Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Oregon, FOREST GROVE POST ACUTE's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 3.0, staff turnover (33%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Forest Grove Post Acute?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations.
Is Forest Grove Post Acute Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, FOREST GROVE POST ACUTE has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Oregon. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Forest Grove Post Acute Stick Around?
FOREST GROVE POST ACUTE has a staff turnover rate of 33%, which is about average for Oregon nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Forest Grove Post Acute Ever Fined?
FOREST GROVE POST ACUTE has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Forest Grove Post Acute on Any Federal Watch List?
FOREST GROVE POST ACUTE is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.