The Arbor at Bremerton.
The Arbor at Bremerton is Ranked in the bottom 16% on citation severity among Washington peers with 7 DSHS citations on record; last inspected Jun 2025.
A large home, reviewed on public record.
Compared to 38 Washington facilities with a similar number of beds.
ALF memory care · 36-month window. Higher percentile = better performance on inspection record. Source: Washington DSHS · Aging and Disability Services Administration.
among peers to rank.
Rankings based on 36-month DSHS inspection data. Severity and frequency: fewer citations = higher percentile. Repeat rate: lower repeat citation share = higher percentile.
FACILITY WATCH · FREE
The Arbor at Bremerton has 7 citations on record. Know the moment anything changes.
New findings, complaint investigations, or status changes — emailed to you free.
Where are you in the process? (optional)
Citation history, plotted month by month.
7 deficiencies on record. Each bar is a month with a citation.
Finding distribution
7 total · 36 monthsScope × Severity (CMS A–L)
Questions to ask before you visit.
A short pre-tour checklist tailored to The Arbor at Bremerton's record and state requirements.
Washington DSHS records show 8 deficiencies across 7 inspection reports — can you walk us through the most recent corrective action plan from the May 2024 inspection and explain what changes were made to prevent recurrence?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
Six complaints were filed with DSHS Residential Care Services during the inspection period on file — can you tell us which of those complaints were substantiated, and share the written remediation steps the facility documented in response?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
This facility holds a DSHS Specialized Dementia Care contract — can you show us the written dementia care program that describes how staff are trained to support residents with memory loss, and confirm that training records are available for review?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
Every inspection visit, verbatim.
6 inspections in the public record, most recent first. Click any row to expand — cited rows open automatically.
2025-06-01Complaint InvestigationType A · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation found that seven staff members had incomplete tuberculosis test records that did not follow CDC protocol for test reading timelines, and this deficiency was cited under state regulations. Multiple other allegations—including claims about an unqualified executive director, rodents in food areas, resident neglect, and medication mishandling—were investigated but not substantiated, with inspectors finding no evidence to support them. Inspectors interviewed 16 residents and reviewed records during this investigation without identifying violations related to resident care or safety.
“Seven staff members (Staff B, C, F, J, K, O, and P) had TB test results that were not properly recorded or read within the required 48-72 hour window per CDC protocol, placing 36 residents at risk of potential disease transmission.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2481(1): Seven staff members (Staff B, C, F, J, K, O, and P) had TB test results that were not properly recorded or read within the required 48-72 hour window per CDC protocol, placing 36 residents at risk of potential disease transmission.
2025-04-01Complaint InvestigationType A · 2 findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation at The Arbor at Bremerton (January 30–March 13, 2025) found that medications were administered to a resident who passed away on February 10, 2025, but the medication administration record was not properly documented because the staff member who actually gave the medications could not access the facility's computer system, resulting in the medications being incorrectly marked as "not administered"—though the medications were actually given and no missed dose or harm to the resident was substantiated. The facility was cited for this failure under medication services regulations because the documentation gap created potential for significant harm. Additionally, the investigation found that four of six sampled residents' admission assessments were not performed by qualified assessors as required by state law, placing residents at risk of having their needs inadequately addressed.
“The facility failed to ensure that resident assessments were performed by a qualified assessor for 4 of 6 sampled residents. Initial admission assessments were provided by an Executive Director who was not qualified to perform such assessments, placing residents at risk of not having their needs adequately met.”
“The facility failed to ensure medication technician staff could accurately document medication administration in the medication administration record. A resident's narcotic medications were documented as 'out of parameters' by a med tech who was not present at the time of administration, creating risk of inadequate or unsafe medication administration.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2080: The facility failed to ensure that resident assessments were performed by a qualified assessor for 4 of 6 sampled residents. Initial admission assessments were provided by an Executive Director who was not qualified to perform such assessments, placing residents at risk of not having their needs adequately met. WAC 388-78A-2210: The facility failed to ensure medication technician staff could accurately document medication administration in the medication administration record. A resident's narcotic medications were documented as 'out of parameters' by a med tech who was not present at the time of administration, creating risk of inadequate or unsafe medication administration.
2025-02-01Complaint Investigation2 findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation of The Arbor at Bremerton on November 8, 2024, found that the facility failed to provide one sampled resident with the correct dietary texture as required by their service agreement—staff served the resident regular corn and ground beef instead of the prescribed finger foods, creating a risk of aspiration and weight loss. The facility's medication technician stated that the kitchen frequently does not provide the required finger food options. A deficiency was cited, and the facility was required to submit a plan of correction within 10 calendar days.
“The facility's call bell system was not adequately notifying on-duty staff when residents pressed call lights. Staff were unaware that call bells had been pressed in resident rooms. The facility had already purchased additional pagers to address the issue and this was corrected on-site during the visit.”
“The facility failed to ensure one sampled resident was provided the correct dietary texture as specified in their negotiated service agreement. The resident required finger foods but was observed eating corn and ground beef with a spoon, and staff reported that finger foods were not frequently provided by the kitchen, creating risk of dietary complications including weight loss and aspiration.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2160: The facility failed to ensure one sampled resident was provided the correct dietary texture as specified in their negotiated service agreement. The resident required finger foods but was observed eating corn and ground beef with a spoon, and staff reported that finger foods were not frequently provided by the kitchen, creating risk of dietary complications including weight loss and aspiration. WAC 388-78A-2930: The facility's call bell system was not adequately notifying on-duty staff when residents pressed call lights. Staff were unaware that call bells had been pressed in resident rooms. The facility had already purchased additional pagers to address the issue and this was corrected on-site during the visit.
2024-05-01Annual Compliance VisitNo findings
2024-03-01Complaint InvestigationType A · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
I don't have enough information in the document provided to write a meaningful summary. The narrative section is blank, and the outcome indicates either a failed provider practice was identified with citations written, or no citation was written, but doesn't specify what was actually investigated or found. Please provide the complete inspection narrative so I can summarize what was found during the complaint investigation.
“Facility failed to implement adequate policies and procedures to prevent resident-to-resident violence. A male resident with documented daily violent behavior struck a female resident multiple times, causing significant injury requiring hospitalization. Despite five documented altercations between 12-17-23 and 01-24-24 with three resulting in injury, the facility's only intervention was increased hourly monitoring and the resident repeatedly refused offered PRN medication. Psychiatric evaluation was not requested until after the fifth altercation.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2600: Facility failed to implement adequate policies and procedures to prevent resident-to-resident violence. A male resident with documented daily violent behavior struck a female resident multiple times, causing significant injury requiring hospitalization. Despite five documented altercations between 12-17-23 and 01-24-24 with three resulting in injury, the facility's only intervention was increased hourly monitoring and the resident repeatedly refused offered PRN medication. Psychiatric evaluation was not requested until after the fifth altercation.
2024-01-01Complaint InvestigationType A · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
I don't have enough information in the source material to write an accurate summary. The document shows that a complaint investigation was conducted, but the "Outcome" field is marked "N/A" and the narrative section is blank, so I cannot determine what was actually found or what citation, if any, was issued. To provide families with a meaningful summary, I would need the actual inspection findings and details about what was investigated.
“The door lock to a resident room lacked a key cylinder and could not be opened from outside if locked from inside by residents. Staff reported the lock had been in this defective condition for months. A resident fell in the room and was unable to be assisted by staff, forcing the resident to crawl to the door to open it for staff assistance.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2703: The door lock to a resident room lacked a key cylinder and could not be opened from outside if locked from inside by residents. Staff reported the lock had been in this defective condition for months. A resident fell in the room and was unable to be assisted by staff, forcing the resident to crawl to the door to open it for staff assistance.
1 older inspection from 2023 are not shown above.
Get the complete record, translated into plain language — emailed to you.
Other facilities in Kitsap County.
Other memory care facilities in Kitsap County with similar care offerings.
Free · Full Inspection Record
Family reviews
No reviews yet — be the first to share your experience
Other memory care options nearby.
More options in neighboring cities
Licensed memory care in other cities within this county region — useful when your search radius crosses city limits.