Cottages of Snohomish.
Cottages of Snohomish is Ranked in the top 37% of Washington memory care with 7 DSHS citations on record; last inspected Mar 2026.
A large home, reviewed on public record.
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
Cottages of Snohomish 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 Cottages of Snohomish's record and state requirements.
DSHS records show 6 inspection reports on file with 6 deficiencies cited — can you walk us through the most recent deficiency findings from the March 1, 2026 inspection and show us the written corrective action plans the facility submitted to Residential Care Services?
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 record — were any of those complaints substantiated, and what specific changes did the facility implement in response to substantiated findings?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
The facility holds a DSHS Specialized Dementia Care contract — can you describe in writing what dementia-specific supports and programming that contract requires you to provide, and how those supports differ from the baseline assisted living services?
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.
2026-03-01Annual Compliance VisitNo findings
2025-09-01Complaint InvestigationType B · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
I don't have enough information in the source text to write an accurate summary. The document shows a complaint investigation was conducted, but the "Outcome" and "Narrative" sections are blank or incomplete, so I cannot determine what was actually found or whether any violations were cited. To provide families with reliable information, I would need the inspection findings, what was investigated, and what the inspectors concluded.
“The ALF's diet manual was not reviewed in the last five years and was not approved, dated, and signed by a registered dietitian.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2300(2)(a)(i,ii,iii): The ALF's diet manual was not reviewed in the last five years and was not approved, dated, and signed by a registered dietitian.
2025-08-01Complaint Investigation1 finding
Plain-language summary
I don't have sufficient detail from this document to write an accurate summary. The inspection form shows a complaint investigation occurred, but the narrative section and conclusion fields are blank or contain only template language without specific findings about what was investigated or what was found. To provide families with meaningful information about inspection results, I would need the actual details of the complaint, what was examined, and what the investigators concluded.
“The ALF did not assist the Named Resident with coordination of care, specifically failing to provide assistance when the resident had a telehealth appointment despite the resident having mild memory loss and documented need for outside provider coordination.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2350(1): The ALF did not assist the Named Resident with coordination of care, specifically failing to provide assistance when the resident had a telehealth appointment despite the resident having mild memory loss and documented need for outside provider coordination.
2025-07-01Complaint InvestigationType B · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation at Cottages of Snohomish on May 2-8, 2025 found that the facility failed to complete a required focused assessment for a resident who was prescribed a knee scooter as a medical device; the resident later tripped and fell while using the scooter. The facility was cited for violating state regulations requiring assessment of safety considerations related to medical devices within 14 days of admission and when a resident experiences an injury requiring medical intervention.
“The assisted living facility failed to complete a focused assessment for a resident who used a knee scooter after the resident had an injury requiring intervention of a practitioner. The facility did not document an assessment of the resident's use of the knee scooter as a medical device despite a prescription from a podiatrist and a subsequent fall incident.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2100(2)(b)(iii): The assisted living facility failed to complete a focused assessment for a resident who used a knee scooter after the resident had an injury requiring intervention of a practitioner. The facility did not document an assessment of the resident's use of the knee scooter as a medical device despite a prescription from a podiatrist and a subsequent fall incident.
2025-05-01Complaint InvestigationType B · 2 findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation at Cottages of Snohomish from November 2024 through March 2025 found that three sampled residents did not receive medications as ordered, and a citation was issued for non-compliance with medication administration rules. The investigation also examined allegations about staffing, a resident death, DNR paperwork accessibility, meal service, unlicensed staff performing medication administration, facility conditions, and retaliation, with the facility making corrections including increasing memory care unit staffing to two staff members per shift, improving access to DNR and POLST forms, and conducting staff training on emergency protocols. No additional failed provider practices were identified in the investigation's review of the other allegations.
“The ALF allowed a resident's medications to run out. Three medications ran out on 12/10/2024, and refills were not obtained until 12/11/2024.”
“The ALF allowed two staff members who were not nurse delegated to check blood sugars and administer insulin to residents.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2210: The ALF allowed a resident's medications to run out. Three medications ran out on 12/10/2024, and refills were not obtained until 12/11/2024. WAC 388-78A-2210: Three sampled residents did not receive their medications as ordered. WAC 388-78A-2320: The ALF allowed two staff members who were not nurse delegated to check blood sugars and administer insulin to residents. WAC 388-78A-2320: The ALF allowed a staff member without nurse delegation credentials to administer medications. The staff member misunderstood medication orders and missed a dose for a resident. WAC 388-78A-2210: A named resident did not receive their scheduled insulin injection during an unannounced visit.
2025-04-01Complaint Investigation2 findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation at Cottages of Snohomish on April 23, 2025, found that staff pagers were stored in medication carts instead of being carried at all times, which delayed responses to resident call pendants, and that staff were not consistently documenting showers and other activities in resident records. The facility was cited for these deficiencies under state communication and record-keeping rules and immediately reminded staff and provided in-service training on proper protocols. The facility corrected both issues and was not required to submit a formal plan of correction.
“The facility failed to ensure that resident pendants were responded to within a reasonable time. Care staff pagers were found in medication cart drawers instead of being in the possession of care staff at all times during work.”
“Staff were not consistently documenting ADL tasks such as showers in resident records, which is required for monitoring resident well-being and ensuring continuity of care.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2930: The facility failed to ensure that resident pendants were responded to within a reasonable time. Care staff pagers were found in medication cart drawers instead of being in the possession of care staff at all times during work. WAC 388-78A-2410: Staff were not consistently documenting ADL tasks such as showers in resident records, which is required for monitoring resident well-being and ensuring continuity of care.
Free · Tour Prep
Family reviews
No reviews yet — be the first to share your experience
More options in neighboring cities
Licensed memory care in other cities within this county region — useful when your search radius crosses city limits.