Vineyard Park of Puyallup.
Vineyard Park of Puyallup is Ranked in the top 50% of Washington memory care with 8 DSHS citations on record; last inspected Sep 2025.
A large home, reviewed on public record.
© Google Street View
Compared to 43 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
Vineyard Park of Puyallup has 8 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.
8 deficiencies on record. Each bar is a month with a citation.
Finding distribution
8 total · 36 monthsScope × Severity (CMS A–L)
Questions to ask before you visit.
A short pre-tour checklist tailored to Vineyard Park of Puyallup's record and state requirements.
The facility holds a DSHS Specialized Dementia Care contract — can you show families the written dementia care program that describes your approach to memory care, and explain how staff competency in dementia care is documented and maintained?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
DSHS records show 5 inspection reports on file with 5 deficiencies total — can you walk us through the corrective action plans for those deficiencies and provide documentation that each has been resolved?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
Four complaints were filed with DSHS Residential Care Services during the inspection period on file — were any of those complaints substantiated, and what specific changes did the facility make in response?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
Every inspection visit, verbatim.
5 inspections in the public record, most recent first. Click any row to expand — cited rows open automatically.
2025-09-01Annual Compliance VisitType A · 2 findings
Plain-language summary
A routine inspection at Vineyard Park of Puyallup on June 23–24, 2025 found that the facility was not properly managing food safety in the Memory Care Unit, with hot foods served below safe temperatures (chicken at 127°F, potatoes at 126°F, corn at 118°F when they should be at least 135°F) and multiple refrigerated items stored without date labels or in unsafe containers, placing all 83 residents at risk of foodborne illness. The facility's food cart was not being plugged in to keep hot meals warm, and staff were not following the chef's instructions to label and discard old food despite these practices being communicated to them. The facility must submit a plan to correct these violations.
“The facility failed to ensure that a Washington state name and date of birth background check was completed every two years for one sampled staff member (Executive Director). The required background check was due on 05/15/2025 but had not been completed.”
“The facility failed to serve food at safe temperatures in the Memory Care Unit. Observations showed chicken served at 127.3°F, mashed potatoes at 125.6°F, and corn at 118.4°F, all below the required 135°F minimum. Staff indicated the food cart was not being plugged in to keep food warm.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2305: The facility failed to serve food at safe temperatures in the Memory Care Unit. Observations showed chicken served at 127.3°F, mashed potatoes at 125.6°F, and corn at 118.4°F, all below the required 135°F minimum. Staff indicated the food cart was not being plugged in to keep food warm. WAC 388-78A-2305: The facility failed to properly label and date mark food items in refrigerated storage. Multiple items were found without date labels including an opened can of tomato sauce, a pitcher of orange liquid, and a can of chocolate pudding. One dated item (corned beef from 06/11/2025) remained in storage for over a week. WAC 388-78A-2466-1: The facility failed to ensure that a Washington state name and date of birth background check was completed every two years for one sampled staff member (Executive Director). The required background check was due on 05/15/2025 but had not been completed.
2025-06-01Complaint InvestigationNo findings
2025-04-01Complaint InvestigationType B · 2 findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation at Vineyard Park of Puyallup in August and November 2024 found that the facility failed to provide showers as agreed in service plans for two residents, with one resident going without a shower for up to 20 days and another having no documented showers for the entire month of August despite agreements to provide two showers per week. The facility was cited for not providing care and services as negotiated in resident service agreements. Families repeatedly reported concerns about the lack of showers, and facility staff inconsistently explained whether showers were refused by residents or simply not provided.
“The assisted living facility failed to provide care and services as agreed upon in negotiated service agreements. Two of four sampled residents did not receive their scheduled two showers per week as documented in their agreements. Resident 1 went without showers for multiple weeks in September, and Resident 2 received minimal showers with gaps of weeks in July-August and only two showers in September.”
“The assisted living facility failed to ensure that negotiated service agreements were properly agreed upon and signed as required. Three of four sampled residents (Residents 2, 3, and 4) did not have negotiated service agreements that were signed in compliance with regulations, placing residents at risk for not receiving necessary care and services.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2160: The assisted living facility failed to provide care and services as agreed upon in negotiated service agreements. Two of four sampled residents did not receive their scheduled two showers per week as documented in their agreements. Resident 1 went without showers for multiple weeks in September, and Resident 2 received minimal showers with gaps of weeks in July-August and only two showers in September. WAC 388-78A-2150: The assisted living facility failed to ensure that negotiated service agreements were properly agreed upon and signed as required. Three of four sampled residents (Residents 2, 3, and 4) did not have negotiated service agreements that were signed in compliance with regulations, placing residents at risk for not receiving necessary care and services.
2024-07-01Complaint Investigation1 finding
“The facility failed to properly discharge a resident from the assisted living facility, as documented through record review, interviews with the resident's representative, collateral contacts, and staff interviews.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
—: The facility failed to properly discharge a resident from the assisted living facility, as documented through record review, interviews with the resident's representative, collateral contacts, and staff interviews.
2024-02-01Complaint Investigation3 findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation at Vineyard Park of Puyallup found that the facility failed to provide proper written notice before discharging a resident; facility staff called the resident's representative on a Friday afternoon stating the resident had to leave that day due to staffing limitations, but no advance written discharge notice was ever given and no documentation showed the facility attempted to avoid the discharge through reasonable accommodations. The resident was transferred to another facility without receiving the orderly preparation and orientation required by state law, placing her at risk for emotional distress. A citation for this deficiency was issued.
“The facility failed to give advance notice of additional charges for services to the resident as required. This allegation was investigated but specific details of the violation are not fully documented in the provided text.”
“The facility failed to provide proper discharge notice to a resident prior to discharge. The resident was discharged on short notice without advance written notification to the resident's representative regarding the reasons for discharge, and no documentation showed reasonable accommodations were attempted to avoid the transfer.”
“The facility failed to consult with the resident's representative when there was a significant change in the resident's condition. Progress notes documented significant deterioration in physical and mental status beginning 02/24/2021, but there was no documentation that the resident's representative was notified of these changes until the day of discharge.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
RCW 70.129.110: The facility failed to provide proper discharge notice to a resident prior to discharge. The resident was discharged on short notice without advance written notification to the resident's representative regarding the reasons for discharge, and no documentation showed reasonable accommodations were attempted to avoid the transfer. WAC 388-78A-2640: The facility failed to consult with the resident's representative when there was a significant change in the resident's condition. Progress notes documented significant deterioration in physical and mental status beginning 02/24/2021, but there was no documentation that the resident's representative was notified of these changes until the day of discharge. —: The facility failed to give advance notice of additional charges for services to the resident as required. This allegation was investigated but specific details of the violation are not fully documented in the provided text.
Other facilities in Pierce County.
Other memory care facilities in Pierce County with similar care offerings.
Free · Contract Decoder
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.