HOLLADAY PARK PLAZA
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Holladay Park Plaza in Portland, Oregon, has a Trust Grade of B+, which means it is recommended and performs above average compared to similar facilities. It ranks #10 out of 127 nursing homes in Oregon and #2 out of 33 in Multnomah County, placing it in the top tier for both the state and local area. The facility shows an improving trend, with issues decreasing from 13 in 2023 to just 2 in 2024. Staffing is a strength, boasting a 5/5 star rating and a turnover rate of 43%, which is better than the state average, indicating that staff are experienced and familiar with residents' needs. However, there are some concerns, including incidents where the facility failed to provide important information about bed hold policies to a resident being transferred to the hospital and not following physician orders for daily weight checks for another resident. Additionally, there was a lack of privacy for a resident during dental care, as their door was left open. While Holladay Park Plaza has many strengths, families should consider these weaknesses as part of their decision-making process.
- Trust Score
- B+
- In Oregon
- #10/127
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 43% 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 ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 57 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Oregon. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 17 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (43%)
5 points below Oregon average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Oregon avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 17 deficiencies on record
Jun 2024
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0625
(Tag F0625)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide residents with a written notice of the facility's bed hold policy at the time of transfer to the hospital for 1 of...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow physician orders for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#81) reviewed for edema (swelling caused by a collection...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
13 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0583
(Tag F0583)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident door was closed during care for 1 of 1 resident (#15) reviewed for privacy. This placed res...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview it was determined the facility failed to follow-up with a report of a missing item for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#11) reviewed for personal property. This placed residents at risk fo...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
2. Resident 21 was admitted to the facility in 12/2021 with diagnoses including stroke.
Resident 21's 2/22/2023 quarterly MDS indicated the resident required extensive assistance from two or more sta...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure care plans were revised to reflect resident current needs for 2 of 3 sampled residents (#s 1 and 15) r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0679
(Tag F0679)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure residents had a meaningful activity program for 1 of 4 sampled residents (#1) reviewed for activities....
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
2. Resident 234 was admitted to the facility in 2/2023 with diagnoses including hypertension and congestive heart failure.
Resident 234's 2/2023 Physician Orders included metoprolol tartrate (a medic...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow care planned interventions for positioning for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#21) reviewed for positioning...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0688
(Tag F0688)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident was provided RA for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#11) reviewed for ADLs. This placed residents at risk for d...
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 interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident was supervised when provided fluids for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#15) reviewed for accidents. This plac...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide the necessary care and services related to incontinent care for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#21) review...
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 observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident was evaluated for additional interventions and services for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#11) r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to ensure a resident's Foley catheter was maintained in a manner to prevent infections for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#1) reviewe...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0883
(Tag F0883)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide the influenza immunization for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#18) reviewed for immunizations. This placed residents at...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2022
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure resident bowel medication was withheld when contraindicated for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#11) reviewed for unneces...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0806
(Tag F0806)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure resident food preferences were honored for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#134) reviewed for food concerns....
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Grade B+ (85/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Oregon.
- • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Oregon facilities.
- • 43% turnover. Below Oregon's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 17 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Holladay Park Plaza's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns HOLLADAY PARK PLAZA an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much 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 Holladay Park Plaza Staffed?
CMS rates HOLLADAY PARK PLAZA's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 43%, compared to the Oregon average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Holladay Park Plaza?
State health inspectors documented 17 deficiencies at HOLLADAY PARK PLAZA during 2022 to 2024. These included: 17 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Holladay Park Plaza?
HOLLADAY PARK PLAZA is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility is operated by PACIFIC RETIREMENT SERVICES, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 51 certified beds and approximately 30 residents (about 59% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in PORTLAND, Oregon.
How Does Holladay Park Plaza Compare to Other Oregon Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Oregon, HOLLADAY PARK PLAZA's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.0, staff turnover (43%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (5 stars) is much above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Holladay Park Plaza?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?"
Is Holladay Park Plaza Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, HOLLADAY PARK PLAZA has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 5-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Oregon. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Holladay Park Plaza Stick Around?
HOLLADAY PARK PLAZA has a staff turnover rate of 43%, 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 Holladay Park Plaza Ever Fined?
HOLLADAY PARK PLAZA 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 Holladay Park Plaza on Any Federal Watch List?
HOLLADAY PARK PLAZA 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.