Brighton Court Assisted Living.
Brighton Court Assisted Living is Ranked in the bottom 16% on citation severity among Washington peers with 7 DSHS citations on record; last inspected Jul 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
Brighton Court Assisted Living 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 Brighton Court Assisted Living's record and state requirements.
Brighton Court holds a DSHS Specialized Dementia Care contract — can you provide a copy of the written dementia care program that describes how staff are trained to support residents with cognitive impairment, and confirm that all direct-care employees have completed the required dementia-specific training?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
DSHS records show 6 deficiencies across 6 inspection reports, with the most recent inspection on June 1, 2025 — can you walk us through the corrective action plans for those deficiencies and show documentation that DSHS has accepted each plan as complete?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
Five complaints were filed with DSHS Residential Care Services during the inspection period on file — were any of those complaints substantiated, and what specific steps did Brighton Court take in response to any substantiated findings?
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.
2025-07-01Complaint InvestigationType B · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
I don't have enough information in the source material to write an accurate summary. The document shows a complaint investigation occurred but does not describe what was complained about, what was found during the investigation, or what citation (if any) was issued. To provide families with meaningful information, I would need the narrative details from the inspection report.
“The facility ran out of a resident's prescribed medication, resulting in missed medication doses on an infrequent basis. Although the facility had assumed responsibility for obtaining the resident's medications, it failed to obtain them in a correct and timely manner.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2240: The facility ran out of a resident's prescribed medication, resulting in missed medication doses on an infrequent basis. Although the facility had assumed responsibility for obtaining the resident's medications, it failed to obtain them in a correct and timely manner.
2025-06-01Annual Compliance VisitType A · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
During an unannounced full inspection from April 8–15, 2025, DSHS Licensor found that Brighton Court Assisted Living (License #2629) failed to ensure three residents received their prescribed medications as required by state regulations, which resulted in residents not receiving medications as prescribed and placed them at risk of health complications. The deficiency cited involved the facility's failure to implement a safe medication delivery system, including a failure to administer clopidogrel bisulfate (a blood thinner) and other medications to at least one resident as ordered. The facility was required to submit a plan of correction by May 28, 2025.
“The facility failed to ensure a safe medication delivery system was implemented and failed to ensure medications were given as prescribed for 3 of 11 residents sampled. Resident 9 did not receive clopidogrel bisulfate (15 missed doses from 01/02/2025-01/16/2025) and Seroquel (23 missed doses from 12/06/2024-12/17/2024 and 5 missed doses from 01/01/2025-01/03/2025), and the provider was not notified of missed medications. This placed residents at risk of health complications.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2210: The facility failed to ensure a safe medication delivery system was implemented and failed to ensure medications were given as prescribed for 3 of 11 residents sampled. Resident 9 did not receive clopidogrel bisulfate (15 missed doses from 01/02/2025-01/16/2025) and Seroquel (23 missed doses from 12/06/2024-12/17/2024 and 5 missed doses from 01/01/2025-01/03/2025), and the provider was not notified of missed medications. This placed residents at risk of health complications. WAC 388-78A-2210: The facility failed to ensure residents 2 and 5 received their prescribed medications as part of the safe medication delivery system implementation.
2024-12-01Complaint InvestigationType A · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation at Brighton Court Assisted Living from October 29-31, 2024, found that the facility failed to complete a required character, competence, and suitability review for one housekeeper staff member who had a non-disqualifying criminal conviction on their background check. The facility had investigated an allegation of inappropriate physical contact by staff with a resident, terminated the alleged perpetrator, and provided for resident safety, but the background check compliance gap placed residents at risk of receiving services from staff not properly evaluated for working with vulnerable adults. The facility must correct this deficiency and implement a system to monitor ongoing compliance.
“The facility failed to complete a character, competence, and suitability review for one staff member (Staff B) who had a non-disqualifying criminal conviction. This failure placed residents at risk of receiving services from staff not evaluated for suitability to work with vulnerable adults.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-24701(1): The facility failed to complete a character, competence, and suitability review for one staff member (Staff B) who had a non-disqualifying criminal conviction. This failure placed residents at risk of receiving services from staff not evaluated for suitability to work with vulnerable adults.
2024-09-01Complaint InvestigationType A · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation of Brighton Court Assisted Living in Spokane Valley was completed on July 12, 2024, and found a deficiency: the facility failed to include instructions in the care agreement for one resident receiving hospice services regarding food and fluid intake, which put that resident at risk for inconsistent feeding assistance and aspiration. Family members reported concerns that the facility was not providing adequate help with eating and minimal amounts of fluids, and there was disagreement between hospice staff and the family about whether the resident should be fed. The facility is required to correct this violation and maintain compliance with all licensing regulations.
“The facility failed to include instructions in the negotiated service agreement related to a resident's food and fluid intake. The resident received hospice services and required assistance with feeding, but the care plan did not address specific feeding assistance protocols, placing the resident at risk for inconsistent feeding assistance and aspiration.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2140(1)(a)(iii)(b)(2): The facility failed to include instructions in the negotiated service agreement related to a resident's food and fluid intake. The resident received hospice services and required assistance with feeding, but the care plan did not address specific feeding assistance protocols, placing the resident at risk for inconsistent feeding assistance and aspiration.
2024-07-01Complaint InvestigationType A · 2 findings
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation on May 6, 2024 found that Brighton Court Assisted Living allowed a staff member to administer insulin injections and perform blood sugar checks on a resident without the required nursing delegation certification, training, or registration—placing residents at risk of unsafe medication administration. The facility stated the staff member had been scheduled as a medication technician without the appropriate credentials by mistake. A deficiency was cited, and the facility was required to submit a plan of correction and demonstrate ongoing compliance with nursing delegation requirements.
“The facility failed to ensure nurse delegation criteria was followed. A medication technician performed blood sugar checks and administered insulin without being registered or certified as a nursing assistant, and without completing required basic caregiver training and core delegation training plus special focus diabetes training.”
“Staff C, a medication technician, was not properly credentialed and had not completed required nurse delegation trainings. Personnel records lacked proof of registration or certification and verification of completion of basic caregiver training, core delegation training, and special focus diabetes training before performing delegated nursing tasks.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2320(1)(a)(b): The facility failed to ensure nurse delegation criteria was followed. A medication technician performed blood sugar checks and administered insulin without being registered or certified as a nursing assistant, and without completing required basic caregiver training and core delegation training plus special focus diabetes training. WAC 246-840-930(8)(a)(b)(c)(d)(e): Staff C, a medication technician, was not properly credentialed and had not completed required nurse delegation trainings. Personnel records lacked proof of registration or certification and verification of completion of basic caregiver training, core delegation training, and special focus diabetes training before performing delegated nursing tasks.
2024-02-01Complaint Investigation1 finding
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation found that the facility failed to submit required background check documentation to the state as mandated by regulations. The facility was cited for this failed practice. Families should be aware that background check compliance is a key requirement for ensuring facility staff have been properly screened.
“A staff member worked at the facility for over four months without a completed background check. The facility did not have a process in place to ensure that background checks requiring additional information were completed and submitted to the department as requested.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
WAC 388-78A-2464(2): A staff member worked at the facility for over four months without a completed background check. The facility did not have a process in place to ensure that background checks requiring additional information were completed and submitted to the department as requested.
Other facilities in Spokane County.
Other memory care facilities in Spokane County with similar care offerings.
Free · Tour Prep
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.