Life Care Center of Skagit Valley: POA Violations - WA
She kept trying. The resident, identified in inspection records only as Resident 1, had been through a hospitalization in January 2025 where they had gone through their end-of-life preferences carefully, writing down their wishes. They wanted their life prolonged if feasible. They did not want water or other life-sustaining measures withdrawn. The woman, identified as CC3 in federal inspection records, had those wishes in hand. The facility's nursing staff turned her away at the door.
By the time inspectors from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services arrived at the Sedro Woolley facility in December 2025, Resident 1 was gone. A physician had reached out to a friend of the resident, that friend had become their power of attorney, the resident had been placed on hospice, and they had been moved to an adult family home.
CC3 told inspectors she had visited Resident 1 every other week during their stay. She had tried repeatedly to reach the facility's social worker, identified as Staff C, by phone to coordinate getting the POA documents signed and the advance directives filed. Staff C never called her back. The one phone conversation they did have was about accompanying Resident 1 to a medical appointment. CC3 was never invited to a care conference for Resident 1. She never attended one.
A second family contact, identified as CC2, told inspectors that Resident 1 had refused consent for a surgery, and that was the reason the facility pursued a POA to make that decision for them.
Staff C told inspectors a different version of events. According to Staff C, CC3 had previously served as Resident 1's POA but had decided she was unwilling to continue acting in that role when Resident 1 was hospitalized before their March 2025 admission to the facility. CC3 remained listed as Resident 1's emergency contact. Staff C said she had only been able to connect with CC3 once despite reaching out many times, a direct contradiction of CC3's account that it was her calls going unreturned.
Staff C acknowledged that the decision to pursue Resident 1's friend as a new POA came through physician direction, not through any documented process involving Resident 1 directly. When inspectors asked whether anyone had discussed the physician's request with Resident 1, Staff C said there had been "some conversation in passing." She had not documented any of it. The only thing she had witnessed was a conversation between Resident 1 and the friend about the friend becoming POA.
Staff C described Resident 1 as having an obvious developmental disability and said their cognition fluctuated with changes in their medical condition. Staff B, a registered nurse and unit manager, told inspectors that Resident 1 "had a pattern of rejecting medications, food, water and not interact or speak" when showing symptoms of a urinary tract infection, and that their mentality was "one of a five-year-old." Staff C described Resident 1 as someone who would "play possum," pretending to be asleep and not speaking for days.
Whether Resident 1 had the capacity to make their own decisions, and when, is precisely the kind of question that requires documentation, formal assessment, and a process that involves the people who know the resident. None of that appears to have happened here in any recorded form. Staff C told inspectors there had been some discussion about pursuing formal guardianship for Resident 1 but did not know whether that process had ever started.
What the record does show is that Resident 1 arrived at the facility with a POLST designating them as full code. They had a known emergency contact who was actively trying to file advance directives reflecting the resident's stated wish to have their life prolonged. That contact's calls went unreturned. Her paperwork was refused at the door. She was left out of care conferences entirely.
A physician then directed staff to begin a POA process with a friend. That friend became the decision-maker. The resident was placed on hospice and moved out of the facility.
CC3 told inspectors what Resident 1 had said they wanted, in January 2025, when they had sat down and gone through it all: their life prolonged if feasible, no withdrawal of water, no withdrawal of life-sustaining measures. Whether anyone at Life Care Center of Skagit Valley ever read those documents is not clear from the inspection record. What is clear is that when CC3 tried to deliver them, the nursing staff would not take them from her hands.
Full Inspection Report
The details above represent a summary of key findings. View the complete inspection report for Life Care Center of Skagit Valley from 2025-12-23 including all violations, facility responses, and corrective action plans.
Additional Resources
Data source: This article is based on inspection data downloaded directly from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) via Medicare.gov. CMS releases inspection reports in bulk; we publish the findings as documented by state surveyors in the official Form CMS-2567 Statement of Deficiencies.
Plan of correction: The CMS report we receive does not include the facility's plan of correction. Facilities submit plans of correction separately to state survey agencies and those responses may not be reflected in CMS data at the time of publication. The absence of a plan of correction in our data does not mean one was not filed. Readers who want information about corrective steps taken are encouraged to contact the facility directly or their state survey agency.
Corrections may have occurred: Inspection reports reflect conditions observed on the date of the survey. Facilities may have implemented corrections, staffing changes, additional training, or other remediation since the report was issued. We report what CMS provides and encourage readers to seek current information from the facility.
Editorial process: Inspection findings are extracted from CMS source documents and synthesized using AI, reviewed for factual accuracy against the original report by our editorial team.
Professional review: All content reviewed by Christopher F. Nesbitt, Sr., NH EMT & BU-trained Paralegal.
Last verified: August 19, 2026 · Our methodology
LIFE CARE CENTER OF SKAGIT VALLEY in SEDRO WOOLLEY, WA was cited for violations during a health inspection on December 23, 2025.
They wanted their life prolonged if feasible.
Health inspections identify deficiencies that facilities must correct. Violations range from minor documentation issues to serious safety concerns. Review the full report below for specific details and facility response.