← Back to search results

Bridges To Home

SHORELINE, WA · King County · Non profit - Corporation · 12 certified beds

📍 18904 Burke Ave N, Shoreline, WA 98133  ·  📞 (206) 629-5878

Medicare ID: 505535  ·  Last Medicare inspection: Mar 4, 2026

Overall Safety Score
47
out of 100
Serious Concerns
Component Scores
57
Inspection
Staffing
44
Enforcement
✓ None
Complaints
50
Quality
📋 Last inspected: March 4, 2026 📦 CMS data as of: May 2026

Score Breakdown

Inspection
57
Staffing
0
Enforcement
44
Complaints
100
Quality Outcomes
50

What the numbers mean

Bridges To Home scored 47 out of 100 — 18 points below the state average of 65.

📋 Inspections: 35 citations over the last 36 months — 34 fewer than the state average (69). 1 was rated serious (G+) — an inspector determined it caused or risked harm to a resident.

🚨 Staffing: Staffing levels are well below average — this is a serious concern. Understaffing leads to worse resident outcomes. We strongly recommend asking for staffing schedules and speaking with current residents or family members before making any decision.

⚠️ Penalties & enforcement: CMS has recorded 3 enforcement actions totaling $8,278 against this facility. Penalties are only issued after a facility fails two levels of regulatory review — meaning this is a serious escalation beyond a standard citation. Ask for a written explanation of every fine and what corrective actions were taken.

💬 Complaints: Low complaint activity — few formal complaints from residents or families have triggered inspections. Ask if there is a family council you can speak with.

⚠️ Resident quality outcomes: Some quality measures are below national benchmarks. Areas like fall prevention, pain management, or medication use may warrant closer attention.

🔍 Most cited areas: The facility did not fully protect higher-risk rooms or equipment areas, such as storage, laundry, kitchens, or other spaces where fire could start or spread faster., The facility had a problem with electrical systems, emergency power, outlets, power strips, generators, utilities, or medical gas handling. These issues can create fire or emergency-response risks.. The full report provides the complete citation record with dates, severity levels, and plain-English descriptions.

What inspectors found (last 3 surveys)

35
Total citations
State avg: 68.9
1
Serious (G+)
State avg: 1.9
0
Repeat findings

Top concern areas

22
4
Hazardous Areas & Fire Risks
The facility did not fully protect higher-risk rooms or equipment areas, such as storage, laundry, kitchens, or other spaces where fire could start or spread faster.
3
Electrical & Utility Safety
The facility had a problem with electrical systems, emergency power, outlets, power strips, generators, utilities, or medical gas handling. These issues can create fire or emergency-response risks.

⚖ Penalties & Enforcement

Federal civil monetary penalties (CMPs) are only issued after a facility has failed two levels of regulatory review — meaning problems were found on inspection and the facility could not rebut the findings. This is a serious escalation beyond a standard citation.

$8,278
Total federal fines
3
Enforcement actions
24
Days of payment denial

⚠ Each enforcement action required CMS to make a separate non-compliance determination — meaning this facility failed two levels of regulatory review before any fine was issued. Ask management specifically what violations triggered these fines and what corrective steps were taken.

📋 Enforcement Context Analysis
📊
Enforcement score: 44/100 — 12 points below the state average of 56/100 — worse than most comparable facilities. A score below 70 indicates a meaningful enforcement history that warrants direct conversation with facility management.
Serious Citations That May Have Triggered Enforcement
Fire safety: portable fire extinguishers — No harm, could worsen · Mar 4, 2026
Medication error — no significant harm — Resident was harmed · Aug 4, 2025
E0025 — No harm, could worsen · Aug 4, 2025
Federal Enforcement Actions on Record
Date Type Amount / Length
Aug 18, 2025 Payment Denial 21 days payment denial
Aug 4, 2025 Payment Denial 3 days payment denial
Aug 4, 2025 Fine $8,278

Source: CMS Provider Data Catalog — federal civil monetary penalties & payment denials, 2025–present.

Track this facility with free email alerts

Get notified when new inspections, citations, score changes, or enforcement actions are published for this facility.

No account or payment required. Enter your email and we will save this facility-watch request.

What to know about Bridges To Home

Bridges To Home is a Medicare-certified nursing home in Shoreline, Wa with 12 certified beds. Its current Senior Care Report Card score is 47/100, placing it in the Serious Concerns range. The latest CMS survey date in our data is Mar 4, 2026. Over the last 36 months, our CMS citation data shows 35 citations, including 1 serious finding. Families comparing this facility should pay close attention to inspection history, staffing, penalties and enforcement, quality outcomes before scheduling a tour or accepting placement. Ownership type on file: Non profit - Corporation.

⚠️
Overall Assessment — Serious Concerns  ·  47/100
This facility has notable issues in the federal inspection record that require careful evaluation.
What to do next: Do not choose without thoroughly reviewing all citations below and getting answers in writing from management.
Federal Penalty: $8,278 (3 separate actions)
CMS has imposed civil monetary penalties totaling $8,278 against this facility. Penalties are only levied after a separate non-compliance determination — meaning a facility must fail two levels of regulatory review before a fine is issued. Ask management specifically what violations triggered these fines and what corrective actions were taken.

What this facility's data shows

📋 Inspections
Inspection record is well below average. Multiple or serious deficiencies found.
👥 Staffing
Staffing is below recommended levels. Ask about RN coverage on nights and weekends.
⚖ Penalties
Facility has received federal fines or enforcement sanctions. Requires direct explanation from management.
💬 Complaints
Complaint activity is low — few formal complaints filed by residents or families.
Multiple quality measures are below national benchmarks. Ask management directly about resident care practices.
⚠ Serious Findings on Record: 1 citation(s) where inspectors found actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents. See Section D for the full details and ask management how each was resolved.
Score breakdown — the numbers behind this assessment
👥 Staffing 0
What it measures RN hours per resident per day, total nurse hours, and RN turnover rate.
💡 Understaffing is the strongest single predictor of poor inspection outcomes.
📋 Inspection 57
What it measures Number, severity (A–L), and scope of deficiencies found. Repeat findings carry extra weight.
💡 Every citation in Section D feeds directly into this score.
⚖ Penalties 44
What it measures Whether CMS escalated from a deficiency citation to actual financial or operational sanctions.
💡 A penalty means the facility already failed a second level of regulatory review.
💬 Complaints 100
What it measures Volume of complaint-triggered inspections and the share that were substantiated.
💡 Complaint surveys are unannounced — they often surface issues annual surveys miss.
🎯 Quality outcomes 50
What it measures Resident outcome measures: falls, pressure ulcers, antipsychotic use, weight loss, hospitalizations.
💡 Reflects the lived experience of residents beyond what inspectors observe.

Each pillar scores 0–100 and is combined into the overall score. A strong overall can mask a weak pillar — compare all four and see how they stack against the state average in Section B.

🏗 How This Facility Compares to WA State Averages

Comparing a facility to others in the same state puts its score in context. A facility might have 8 citations and that could be above average in one state and below in another. Green means this facility is doing better than its peers; red means it's falling short.

Metric This facility WA avg vs. State
Overall score
The combined Senior Care Report Card score out of 100.
47 65 ▼ Worse than state avg
Inspection score
How well the facility performs on standard health surveys.
57 51 ▲ Better than state avg
Staffing score
RN hours, total nurse hours, and staff turnover from CMS payroll data.
0 73 ▼ Worse than state avg
Penalty score
Fines, payment denials, and enforcement actions on file.
44 56 ▼ Worse than state avg
Complaint score
Volume of complaint surveys and substantiated complaints.
100 82 ▲ Better than state avg
Quality score
Resident clinical outcomes vs national benchmarks: falls, antipsychotics, pain, vaccination, hospitalizations.
50 65 ▼ Worse than state avg
Citations (3 yrs)
Total number of deficiencies cited in the last 36 months.
35 68.9 ▲ Better than state avg
Serious citations
Citations rated severity G or higher (actual harm or immediate jeopardy).
1 1.9 ▲ Better than state avg

📅 Inspection Timeline

State health inspectors visit nursing homes on a regular cycle — typically every 12 to 15 months — and document every deficiency they find. The timeline below shows the date and scale of each inspection visit over the past several years. A pattern of worsening surveys is a red flag even if the most recent visit looks clean.

2026-03-04
4 citations
2025-08-04
29 citations  (1 serious)
2024-08-08
2 citations

Bar length proportional to citation count. Red = serious findings (severity G+). Orange = elevated. Green = low.

📄 Full Citation Record

Every time state inspectors visit a nursing home, they write up anything that doesn’t meet federal standards. Each write-up is called a citation.

Each citation shows what the problem was and how serious it was, using a color-coded badge:

Confused by codes like F0732 or K0363? Use the free inspection report decoder to understand F-tags, fire-safety K-tags, severity letters, and repeat findings. Get the decoder →
Green — No residents harmed Yellow — Risk of harm, no injury Orange — A resident was harmed Red — Life or safety in danger

A Repeat tag means the same problem appeared in a previous inspection — it was not fully corrected the first time. Citations shown cover the last two years.

Survey: 2026-03-04 4 citation(s)
K0355 No harm, could worsen
Fire safety: portable fire extinguishers
Fire safety: portable fire extinguishers. This is a building, fire protection, emergency preparedness, or electrical-safety issue found during a CMS life-safety inspection. Families should ask what was repaired, when it was corrected, and whether staff were retrained.
K0211 No harm, could worsen
Fire safety: safe exit routes
Fire safety: safe exit routes. This is a building, fire protection, emergency preparedness, or electrical-safety issue found during a CMS life-safety inspection. Families should ask what was repaired, when it was corrected, and whether staff were retrained.
K0372 No harm, could worsen
Fire safety: smoke barriers must be maintained
Fire safety: smoke barriers must be maintained. This is a building, fire protection, emergency preparedness, or electrical-safety issue found during a CMS life-safety inspection. Families should ask what was repaired, when it was corrected, and whether staff were retrained.
K0291 No harm, could worsen
Fire safety: hazardous areas must be protected
Fire safety: hazardous areas must be protected. This is a building, fire protection, emergency preparedness, or electrical-safety issue found during a CMS life-safety inspection. Families should ask what was repaired, when it was corrected, and whether staff were retrained.
Survey: 2025-08-04 29 citation(s) — 1 serious
F0760 Resident was harmed
Medication error — no significant harm
E0025 No harm, could worsen
E0025
E0024 No harm, could worsen
E0024
K0353 No harm, could worsen
Fire safety: sprinkler system maintenance and testing
Fire safety: sprinkler system maintenance and testing. This is a building, fire protection, emergency preparedness, or electrical-safety issue found during a CMS life-safety inspection. Families should ask what was repaired, when it was corrected, and whether staff were retrained.
K0345 No harm, could worsen
Fire safety: fire alarm testing and maintenance
Fire safety: fire alarm testing and maintenance. This is a building, fire protection, emergency preparedness, or electrical-safety issue found during a CMS life-safety inspection. Families should ask what was repaired, when it was corrected, and whether staff were retrained.
E0022 No harm, could worsen
E0022
K0918 No harm, could worsen
Electrical safety: essential electrical system maintenance
Electrical safety: essential electrical system maintenance. This is a building, fire protection, emergency preparedness, or electrical-safety issue found during a CMS life-safety inspection. Families should ask what was repaired, when it was corrected, and whether staff were retrained.
E0032 No harm, could worsen
E0032
E0030 No harm, could worsen
E0030
E0031 No harm, could worsen
E0031
E0020 No harm, could worsen
E0020
K0324 No harm, could worsen
Fire safety: cooking equipment and kitchen protection
Fire safety: cooking equipment and kitchen protection. This is a building, fire protection, emergency preparedness, or electrical-safety issue found during a CMS life-safety inspection. Families should ask what was repaired, when it was corrected, and whether staff were retrained.
K0531 No harm, could worsen
K0531
Fire and life safety requirement. This is a building, fire protection, emergency preparedness, or electrical-safety issue found during a CMS life-safety inspection. Families should ask what was repaired, when it was corrected, and whether staff were retrained.
K0293 No harm, could worsen
Fire safety: hazardous area doors
Fire safety: hazardous area doors. This is a building, fire protection, emergency preparedness, or electrical-safety issue found during a CMS life-safety inspection. Families should ask what was repaired, when it was corrected, and whether staff were retrained.
E0026 No harm, could worsen
E0026
K0921 No harm, could worsen
Electrical safety: equipment grounding
Electrical safety: equipment grounding. This is a building, fire protection, emergency preparedness, or electrical-safety issue found during a CMS life-safety inspection. Families should ask what was repaired, when it was corrected, and whether staff were retrained.
E0018 No harm, could worsen
E0018
E0039 No harm, could worsen
E0039
E0015 No harm, could worsen
E0015
K0914 No harm, could worsen
Electrical safety: outlets, wiring and equipment maintenance
Electrical safety: outlets, wiring and equipment maintenance. This is a building, fire protection, emergency preparedness, or electrical-safety issue found during a CMS life-safety inspection. Families should ask what was repaired, when it was corrected, and whether staff were retrained.
F0880 No harm, could worsen
Infection prevention & control
F0732 No harm, could worsen
Pharmacy policies & procedures
F0761 No harm, could worsen
Medication storage & labeling
F0756 No harm, could worsen
Drug regimen review
F0656 No harm, could worsen
Comprehensive care plan
F0628 No harm, could worsen
F0628
F0607 No harm, could worsen
Abuse & neglect prevention policies
F0658 No harm, could worsen
Services meet professional standards
F0887 No harm, could worsen
F0887
Survey: 2024-08-08 2 citation(s)
K0291 No harm, could worsen
Fire safety: hazardous areas must be protected
Fire safety: hazardous areas must be protected. This is a building, fire protection, emergency preparedness, or electrical-safety issue found during a CMS life-safety inspection. Families should ask what was repaired, when it was corrected, and whether staff were retrained.
K0353 No harm, could worsen
Fire safety: sprinkler system maintenance and testing
Fire safety: sprinkler system maintenance and testing. This is a building, fire protection, emergency preparedness, or electrical-safety issue found during a CMS life-safety inspection. Families should ask what was repaired, when it was corrected, and whether staff were retrained.

💬 Questions to Ask Before Touring

These questions are generated specifically from this facility's score profile and citation history — not a generic checklist. A facility's willingness to answer them openly, and the quality of their answers, is itself an important signal. Bring this list when you tour or call.

  1. Your recent inspection identified multiple deficiencies. For each finding, can you explain exactly what happened and confirm which corrective actions have been fully completed — not just planned?
  2. CMS data shows this facility is significantly below the state average for total nurse hours and RN-specific hours per resident day. What is the actual RN coverage on evenings, nights, and weekends — not the regulatory minimum, but what residents consistently receive?
  3. What is your 90-day CNA and nurse turnover rate? How do you ensure a resident sees the same familiar caregivers across a given week?
  4. This facility has a significant CMS enforcement history. Can you identify each action in the past three years, what it was for, and what systemic — not just procedural — changes were made to prevent recurrence?
  5. Some resident outcome measures are below average here. What is your current approach to fall prevention, pain management, and quarterly medication review?
  6. 1 citation in the public record were rated as causing actual harm to a resident. Can you describe what occurred in each case and what specific safeguards are now in place?
  7. Can we speak privately with two or three current residents or their families?

👪 Family Decision Guide

This guide translates this facility's data into practical next steps for families. It is not a recommendation for or against placement — it is a structured framework for the conversations you need to have before making a decision.

✓ Positives to confirm

  • Low complaint activity — ask if there is a family council you can speak with
  • No pattern of repeat violations detected

⚠ Areas to probe

  • Inspection score is low — ask for the most recent state survey results
  • Staffing concerns — request staffing schedules and ask about agency nurse use
  • Penalty history present — ask what enforcement actions occurred and outcomes
  • Serious-harm citations on record — require a written explanation of corrective action
  • Always speak with at least two current residents or family members independently

📈 Score History

The score is recalculated every time CMS releases updated data (typically monthly). A consistent downward trend is more concerning than a single low score. An improving trend after a period of poor performance may indicate management changes are taking effect. Use the free facility-watch form above to get email alerts when this facility's record changes materially.

2026-06-16
47 — Concerning

🏢 Ownership & Operators

Ownership matters because large corporate chains sometimes prioritize cost controls over care quality. CMS requires every nursing home to disclose its owners, operators, and managing employees. Frequent ownership changes can disrupt staffing and operations — which is why we flag facilities that changed ownership in the past 12 months.

🔗 HENSON, JEFFERSON operates 1 facility across .
Owner / Operator Role Ownership % Effective
HENSON, JEFFERSON Individual 1970-01-01
GRADY, CINDY Individual 1970-01-01
FREEBORN, STEPHEN Individual 1970-01-01
MAAZ, KEN Individual 1970-01-01

🔔 Monthly tracking is now free

We check CMS data monthly. Use the tracking form above and we will email you when new citations appear, scores change, or enforcement actions are added.

📋
Monthly report update
New citation alerts
📈
Score trend tracking
🏠 Verify this data on Medicare.gov
All data in this report comes from the CMS Care Compare database. You can review the official public record directly on Medicare.gov — including the full inspection narrative, star ratings, and any recent enforcement actions.
View on Medicare.gov ↗

This report reflects publicly available CMS data only and is updated monthly. Severity codes and narratives are reproduced directly from the CMS health inspection database. Senior Care Report Card scores are independently computed and are not affiliated with or endorsed by CMS or Medicare.gov.

Frequently asked questions

What is the Senior Care Report Card safety score for Bridges To Home?
Bridges To Home has an independently computed Safety Score of 47 out of 100, based on CMS inspection findings, staffing levels, penalty history, complaint volume, and quality measures.
Where is Bridges To Home located?
Bridges To Home is located in Shoreline, WA. View the full address, phone number, and a map at the top of this report.
How many beds does Bridges To Home have?
Bridges To Home is certified for 12 beds in the CMS Care Compare dataset.
When was the most recent CMS health inspection at Bridges To Home?
The most recent CMS health inspection summarized in this report was completed on March 4, 2026. CMS publishes a new inspection cycle approximately every 12 months.
What does the Senior Care Report Card Safety Score measure?
The Safety Score (0-100) combines five public-data signals: CMS health inspection severity, nursing staffing hours per resident, civil monetary penalties, complaint counts, and quality measures. Methodology and weightings are documented at /how-it-works/.
Is the report on Bridges To Home affiliated with the facility?
No. This report is independently computed from public CMS Care Compare data and is not affiliated with Bridges To Home, CMS, or Medicare.gov. It is provided as a research aid for families.

Data source: CMS Care Compare · Methodology · State Ombudsman

This report uses public CMS nursing home data and simplified scoring to help families ask better questions. It is not a recommendation, ranking, medical opinion, legal opinion, or substitute for an in-person visit. Source data last published by CMS: May 27, 2026.