Regency at the Park

Regency at the Park is an average-sized nursing home located in College Place, Washington. This nursing home received an overall rating of F. This facility is just about as bad as it gets. We wouldn't blame you if you are ready to stop reading and find another facility. However, if you want to learn more about this place's category grades, we will discuss nursing in the next paragraph.

Even though we graded this nursing home incredibly poorly overall, it received a fairly respectable nursing rating this year. We gave it a B- in that category. When computing our nursing ratings, we analyze both the number of hours nurses spend with residents and the training levels of the nurses. This facility provided 3.5 hours of nursing care per patient on a daily basis. Roughly a quarter of those hours were provided by registered nurses, which are one of the most highly skilled levels of nurses. This is a high ratio of skilled nursing care, which we weight more heavily in our nursing grades. Lastly, we also factored in some quality-based metrics. This place fared well in some of the quality measures we looked at. By way of illustration, in terms of the number of its patients suffering from pressure ulcers, this place outpaced the national average. This is usually a good indicator that a place has quality controls in place. Pressure ulcers can generally be avoided with better nursing care.

This facility also didn't rate poorly in the category of short-term care. Indeed, we gave it a B- for that category, which ended up being among its more respectable grades. In calculating these short-term care ratings, we quantify the nursing home's skilled nursing services, such as those performed by registered nurses, respiratory therapists, physical therapists and other types of therapists. The goal is to devise a scale for sizing up the rehabilitation services of different facilities. This nursing home is above the national average in terms of its volume of physical therapy and registered nurse hours provided to its patients. These are generally good indicators of quality short-term care. The final item we looked at in this area is the percentage of residents who ultimately returned home from the nursing home. This place fared well with 58 percent of its patients returning home. At most nursing homes, fewer than half of their short-term residents are able to return home.

Unfortunately, this facility didn't receive glowing inspections in recent years. We gave it a grade of just D for our inspections rating. We take several aspects of a facility's inspection report into consideration in computing these inspection ratings. One critical factor is health deficiencies. We suggest you scrutinize the severity of those deficiencies. This nursing home was hit with 3 deficiencies by CMS. The only favorable thing we can say is that none of its deficiencies were in the categories that indicate that they caused a threat to patient safety or health. Finally, CMS cited this nursing home for possible abuse or neglect. Hopefully, its performance improves in the future, but until then we simply can't recommend this facility.

The next category we scored is long-term care. It received a lowly F in this category, which is a bottom of the barrel score. For residents looking for a permanent place to live rather than rehabilitation, long-term care is a very important category. One of the criteria we considered in addition to nursing hours is vaccines. Fortunately, this facility provided the pneumonia vaccine to 100 percent of its patients. Surprisingly, this place was able to limit hospitalizations. With only 1.4 hospitalizations per one thousand long-term resident days, this facility has fewer hospitalizations than most nursing homes. Sadly, a few of its other scores in the category weren't as favorable as these.