Greenlake Emerald City.
Greenlake Emerald City is Ranked in the bottom 15% on citation frequency among Washington peers with 9 DSHS citations on record; last inspected Dec 2025.
A large home, reviewed on public record.
Compared to 14 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
Greenlake Emerald City has 9 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.
9 deficiencies on record. Each bar is a month with a citation.
Finding distribution
9 total · 36 monthsScope × Severity (CMS A–L)
Questions to ask before you visit.
A short pre-tour checklist tailored to Greenlake Emerald City's record and state requirements.
The facility holds a DSHS Specialized Dementia Care contract — can you walk us through the written dementia care program required under that contract, and show us documentation of how staff competency in dementia care is assessed and maintained?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
Five complaints were filed with DSHS during the inspection period on file — were any of those complaints substantiated, and can you share the corrective action plans or remediation steps the facility implemented in response?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
The most recent inspection on September 1, 2025 recorded six deficiencies — can you provide copies of the corrective action plans submitted to DSHS for those deficiencies and confirm that all six have been resolved?
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.
2025-12-01Complaint InvestigationType A · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation at Greenlake Emerald City found that the facility failed to implement policies for handling psychiatric crises and suicide precautions after a resident attempted suicide twice using a hammer and an axe in September and October 2025. The facility did not properly respond to the resident's documented suicidal thoughts, plans, and warning behaviors such as giving away possessions and stopping eating. A deficiency citation was issued on October 31, 2025.
“The facility failed to implement policies and procedures for Accidents, Incidents, and Unusual Occurrences, Ambulance (Emergency) Transport, Emergencies-Major Medical Emergency and Documentation, Mental Health Deterioration, Mental Health/Psychiatric Crisis, and Suicide Precautions for a resident who exhibited suicidal ideations, plans, and a suicide attempt.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2600: The facility failed to implement policies and procedures for Accidents, Incidents, and Unusual Occurrences, Ambulance (Emergency) Transport, Emergencies-Major Medical Emergency and Documentation, Mental Health Deterioration, Mental Health/Psychiatric Crisis, and Suicide Precautions for a resident who exhibited suicidal ideations, plans, and a suicide attempt. WAC 388-78A-2600: The facility gave a discharge notice to a resident that did not meet requirements, failing to record information regarding the notice and discharge in the medical record and failing to include mental health advocacy information as required.
2025-09-01Annual Compliance VisitType B · 2 findings
Plain-language summary
During an unannounced follow-up inspection on July 31, 2025, DSHS found that Greenlake Emerald City failed to ensure two of six staff members completed required facility orientation training before working with residents, placing the facility's 90 residents at risk of harm and injury from caregivers unfamiliar with the facility. The facility was cited for violating Washington licensing regulations regarding staff training and orientation requirements. A plan of correction was required to be completed by August 19, 2025.
“The facility failed to ensure 2 of 6 staff members (Staff B and C) completed required facility orientation training. This placed 90 residents at risk of harm and injury from care staff unfamiliar with the facility.”
“The facility failed to identify and secure hazardous chemicals in a housekeeping cart, common bathroom, and a resident room in the Memory Care Unit. This failure placed 15 residents living in the MCU at risk of harm and poisoning.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2474(3): The facility failed to ensure 2 of 6 staff members (Staff B and C) completed required facility orientation training. This placed 90 residents at risk of harm and injury from care staff unfamiliar with the facility. WAC 388-78A-3100(1)(2): The facility failed to identify and secure hazardous chemicals in a housekeeping cart, common bathroom, and a resident room in the Memory Care Unit. This failure placed 15 residents living in the MCU at risk of harm and poisoning.
2025-04-01Complaint InvestigationType A · 2 findings
“The ALF failed to implement the care plan by not conducting required safety checks four times per shift for a named resident, resulting in the resident being found deceased on the bathroom floor.”
“The ALF failed to implement the facility skin care management policy for a named resident who had significant skin breakdown while in the facility.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
—: The ALF failed to implement the care plan by not conducting required safety checks four times per shift for a named resident, resulting in the resident being found deceased on the bathroom floor. —: The ALF failed to implement the facility skin care management policy for a named resident who had significant skin breakdown while in the facility.
2025-02-01Complaint InvestigationType A · 2 findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation at Greenlake Emerald City from February 11-21, 2025 found that the facility failed to administer a prescribed monthly psychiatric injection medication as ordered by the physician from November 2024 through February 2025, with significant gaps in the dosing schedule. A citation was issued for this medication administration failure, though the resident reported feeling good at the time of the investigation and there was no documented evidence of increased anxiety. This deficiency had been previously cited in August 2024.
“The facility failed to notify the physician or conduct an evaluation when Resident 1 refused medications (Carbidopa/Levodopa 28 times in November, 87 times in December, and 70 times in January 2025; Certivite 16 times in December and 25 times in January 2025). This failure placed the resident at risk for decline in health status.”
“The facility failed to administer haloperidol injections as ordered by the physician. The medication was not documented as administered in November 2024 and January 2025. The time between documented administrations exceeded the prescribed 30-day interval (51 days between October and December 2024; 37 days between December 2024 and February 2025).”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2230: The facility failed to notify the physician or conduct an evaluation when Resident 1 refused medications (Carbidopa/Levodopa 28 times in November, 87 times in December, and 70 times in January 2025; Certivite 16 times in December and 25 times in January 2025). This failure placed the resident at risk for decline in health status. WAC 388-78A-2240: The facility failed to administer haloperidol injections as ordered by the physician. The medication was not documented as administered in November 2024 and January 2025. The time between documented administrations exceeded the prescribed 30-day interval (51 days between October and December 2024; 37 days between December 2024 and February 2025).
2025-01-01Complaint InvestigationType A · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation at this facility in November 2024 found that four caregivers did not have required medical evaluations and fit-testing for respirator masks as mandated by Washington Administrative Code, and this was an uncorrected violation from a previous inspection in September 2024. The investigation also found that the facility failed to ensure one resident received three physician-ordered medications in a timely manner, resulting in missed doses and placing the resident at risk of harm. The facility submitted a plan of correction to address these deficiencies.
“The Assisted Living Facility failed to implement federal and state regulated standards of a Respiratory Protection Program (RPP) including implementing a written RPP, ensuring 3 of 4 staff had medical evaluations, and ensuring 4 of 4 staff had respirator mask fit-testing. This placed 82 residents, staff, and visitors at risk for exposure to SARS-CoV-2.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2730: The Assisted Living Facility failed to implement federal and state regulated standards of a Respiratory Protection Program (RPP) including implementing a written RPP, ensuring 3 of 4 staff had medical evaluations, and ensuring 4 of 4 staff had respirator mask fit-testing. This placed 82 residents, staff, and visitors at risk for exposure to SARS-CoV-2.
2024-09-01Complaint Investigation1 finding
“The facility failed to administer an antibiotic ordered on 06/28/2024 for a urinary tract infection until 07/01/2024, resulting in 6 out of 10 ordered doses not being given to the resident, causing a delay in treatment of the infection.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
—: The facility failed to administer an antibiotic ordered on 06/28/2024 for a urinary tract infection until 07/01/2024, resulting in 6 out of 10 ordered doses not being given to the resident, causing a delay in treatment of the infection.
Other facilities in King County.
Other memory care facilities in King 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.