Hearth Record

Alpha Hospice

A hospice in Everett, Washington 98208

10530 19th Ave Ste Ste 201, Everett, Washington 98208. (425) 595-3059.

CMS’s own record, on Care Compare

Watch and the shortlist are kept with a free account, on every device. Your watch list. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare.

The short answer

Record last released by CMS on Oct 23, 2026.

The last 24 months 4 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Aug 2025. Most serious: Standard-level. Every month

Each figure’s source sits beside it, in its section below.

What these words mean3
Star ratings
CMS rates some kinds of place from 1 to 5 stars, more stars meaning better on CMS’s own measures for that kind: for a nursing home, its health inspections, staffing and quality measures. A rating is CMS’s summary of those measures; it doesn’t promise good care. Source: CMS, Care Compare and the Five-Star Quality Rating System.
Inspection (survey)
A visit by state inspectors, often unannounced, who check a place against the rules it must meet. For nursing homes and other places Medicare pays, CMS calls these visits surveys: a standard survey of a nursing home comes at least every 15 months, and a complaint survey whenever a complaint calls for one. Source: CMS; 42 CFR 488.308.
Deficiency, citation, violation
What inspectors write up when a place didn’t meet a rule: the rule, what they saw, and when. CMS calls it a deficiency; states may say citation or violation. It is the inspectors’ finding, not a court’s, and the place is usually asked for a plan to correct it. Source: CMS, statement of deficiencies (Form CMS-2567); each state’s licensing agency.

What did inspectors find?

4 deficiencies cited in the last three years

The middle of the 13 hospices serving ZIP code 98208 had 2.5.

The last inspection on record was on Aug 28, 2025: a recertification inspection by the state.

Source:

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, Hospice ZIP Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

When those deficiencies happened

4 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Aug 2025. Most serious: Standard-level. The last 3 years, to Oct 27, 2026.

4 deficiencies by month over the last 3 years. Each cell is one month.
JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2023 NovDec
2024 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2025 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2026 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOct

Hover or focus a month to read it.

No visit on record Visited, nothing cited A stronger orange is more serious, on its source’s own levels, read onto four bands: from the least serious it publishes to the most
Source:

Hearth Record drew this from the dates and levels in the source’s own records.

Each deficiency, as cited

Rule titles as CMS’s inspectors cite them, set in sentence case.

Source:

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Aug 28, 2025: recertification inspection by the state4 deficiencies
  • Notice of rights and responsibilities (42 CFR 418.52(a)(1))

    The inspectors’ words, 273 words

    “Based on document review and interview, the agency failed to provide a patient Bill of Rights that is in compliance with the Washington Administrative Code 246-335-635, Hospice Bill of Rights.Failure of the agency to update the patient’s Bill of Rights places the patient at risk of being unaware of their rights pertaining to their care.Reference:WAC 246-335-635 Bill of rights.A hospice agency at the time of admission must provide each patient, designated family member, or legal representative with a written bill of rights affirming each patient’s right to:(8) The name of the individual within the hospice agency responsible for supervising the patient’s care and the manner in which that individual may be contacted. Findings included:1. Document review of the agency’s policy titled, “Patient Bill of Rights,” (Policy #2-002.1, Revised: February 2020) showed that the patient will be informed of the individual within the hospice agency responsible for supervising the patient’s care and the manner in which that individual may be contacted. 2. Document review of the agency’s Hospice admission booklet in Section 3: Patient Rights and Responsibilities showed the agency failed to include the name of the individual within the hospice agency responsible for supervising the patient’s care and the manner in which that individual may be contacted. 3. On 08/27/25 at 2:00 PM, the Surveyor interviewed the agency’s Chief Executive Office & Executive Director (Staff #113) regarding the missing patients’ Bill of Right. Staff #113 acknowledge the finding and was unable to provide documentation of the patients’ Bill of Right showing the name of the individual responsible for supervising the patient’s care and the manner in which that individual may be contacted ..”

    Rule L0502. Standard-level.

  • Content of comprehensive assessment (42 CFR 418.54(c)(7))

    The inspectors’ words, 753 words

    “Based on document review, record reviews, and interview, the agency failed to ensure bereavement risk assessments were completed as part of the initial comprehensive assessment for 6 of 17 Patients (Patient #101, Patient #102, Patient #108, Patient #111, Patient #113, and Patient #116) (Item #1) and failed to ensure bereavement risk assessment was completed timely for 5 of 14 Patients (Patient #104, Patient #106, Patient #110, Patient #117, and Patient #118) (Item #2).Failure to complete a bereavement risk assessment and to complete it timely puts the patient’s family and others at risk of not able to address their ability to cope with the patient’s death. Findings included:Item #1 - Initial Bereavement Assessment1. Document review of the agency’s policy titled, “Bereavement Services,” (Policy # 4-006.1, (Revised: February 2020) showed that a bereavement risk assessment will be completed by the hospice social worker upon the admission. 2. Record review of Patient #101, Patient #102, Patient #108, Patient #111, Patient #113, and Patient #116 showed:a. Patient #101 signed the Hospice Election statement on and was admitted on 11/12/24. Documentation of the initial bereavement risk assessment was not present in the patient record. There was no documentation to explain the absence of the bereavement risk assessment.b. Patient #102 signed the Hospice Election statement on and was admitted on 03/24/25. Documentation of the initial bereavement risk assessment was not present in the patient record. There was no documentation to explain the absence of the bereavement risk assessment.c. Patient #108 signed the Hospice Election statement on and was admitted on 06/27/25. Documentation of the initial bereavement risk assessment was not present in the patient record. There was no documentation to explain the absence of the bereavement risk assessment.d. Patient #111 signed the Hospice Election statement on and was admitted on 08/13/25. Documentation of the initial bereavement risk assessment was not present in the patient record. There was no documentation to explain the absence of the bereavement risk assessment.e. Patient #113 signed the Hospice Election statement on and was admitted on 07/09/24. Documentation of the initial bereavement risk assessment was not present in the patient record. There was no documentation to explain the absence of the bereavement risk assessment.f. Patient #116 signed the Hospice Election statement on and was admitted on 08/13/25. Documentation of the initial bereavement risk assessment was not present in the patient record. There was no documentation to explain the absence of the bereavement risk assessment. 3. On 08/28/25 at 10:00 AM, the Surveyor interviewed the agency’s Director of Clinical Services (Staff #114) regarding the lack of initial bereavement risk assessments. Staff #114 acknowledged the issues regarding the late bereavement assessments and stated that they were unable to provide documentation related to the missing bereavement assessments. Item #2 - Timely Completion of Initial Bereavement Risk Assessment1. Document review of the agency’s policy titled, “Comprehensive Assessment,” (Policy #4-042.1, Revised: February 2020) showed that a comprehensive patient assessment will be performed by the interdisciplinary group no later than 5 calendar days including the bereavement assessment.2. Record review of Patient #104, Patient #106, Patient #110, Patient #117, and Patient #118 showed:a. Patient #104 signed the Hospice Election statement on and was admitted on 03/21/25. The initial bereavement risk assessment was completed on 03/30/25, but there was no documentation to explain the delay of the bereavement risk assessment.b. Patient #106 signed the Hospice Election statement on and was admitted on 03/28/25. The initial bereavement risk assessment was completed on 04/05/25, but there was no documentation to explain the delay of the bereavement risk assessment.c. Patient #110 signed the Hospice Election statement on and was admitted on 09/23/22. The initial bereavement risk assessment was completed on 09/30/22, but there was no documentation to explain the delay of the bereavement risk assessment.d. Patient #117 signed the Hospice Election statement on and was admitted on 09/19/24. The initial bereavement risk assessment was completed on 09/27/24, but there was no documentation to explain the delay of the bereavement risk assessment.e. Patient #118 signed the Hospice Election statement on and was admitted on 09/26/24. The initial bereavement risk assessment was completed on 10/11/24, but there was no documentation to explain the delay of the bereavement risk assessment 3. On 08/28/25 at 10:00 AM, the Surveyor interviewed the agency’s Director of Clinical Services (Staff #114) regarding the late completion of the initial bereavement risk assessment. Staff #114 acknowledged the issues regarding the lack of bereavement assessments as part of the patient’s comprehensive assessment, and stated that they were unable to provide documentation related to the bereavement assessments..”

    Rule L0531. Standard-level.

  • Plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(b))

    The inspectors’ words, 343 words

    “Based on document review, record reviews, and interview, the agency failed to notify the patient’s physician of missed Hospice Aide services resulting in changes to the patient’s plan of care in 3 of 14 active patients (Patient #102, Patient #105, and Patient #112). Failure to communicate with the patient’s physician of changes to the plan of care may potentially have a clinical impact on the patient’s medical needs. Findings included:1. Document review of the agency’s policy titled, “The Plan of Care,” (Policy #4-027.1, Revised: February 2020) showed the plan of care include the detailed statement of the scope and frequency of services necessary to meet the specific patient and family needs.2. Record review of patient records of Patient #102, Patient #105, and Patient #112 showed:a. Patient #102 was admitted on 03/24/25. Hospice Aide (HA) Services were ordered with frequencies of 1 time a week for 13 weeks starting 03/25/25. There was no documentation as to why there were no HA visits made during the Medicare week of 04/06/25 to 04/12/25, and no physician notification of the missed HA visit. b. Patient #105 was admitted on 07/22/24. HA services were ordered with frequencies of 2 times a week for 8 weeks starting 07/17/25. There was no documentation as to why only 1 of 2 HA visits were made during the Medicare week of 08/10/25 to 08/16/25, and no physician notification of the missed visit. c. Patient #112 was admitted on 07/07/25. HA Services were ordered with frequencies of 1 time a week for 13 weeks starting 07/08/25. There was no documentation as to why there were no HA visits made during the Medicare week of 07/20/25 to 07/26/25, and no physician notification of the missed HA visit.3. On 08/28/25 at 10:00 AM, the Surveyor interviewed the agency’s Director of Clinical Services (Staff #114) regarding the lack of documentation and physician notification of the missed HA services. Staff #114 acknowledged the findings and stated that they were unable to provide documentation of why the missed services occurred and why the patient’s physicians were not notified..”

    Rule L0543. Standard-level.

  • Content of plan of care (42 CFR 418.56(c)(2))

    The inspectors’ words, 262 words

    “Based on document review, record review, and interview, the agency failed to follow the plan of care (POC) relative to hospice aides (HA) visit frequencies and failed to notify the patient and/or their representatives of HA missed visits for Patient #108.Failure to follow the POC and communicate with the patient and/or their representatives of changes to the POC may potentially have a clinical impact on the patient’s wellbeing. Findings included:1. Document review of the agency’s policy titled, “Plan of Care”, (Policy # 4-027.1, Revised Date: February 2020) showed that the POC identifies the patient’s needs and the scope and frequency of services necessary to meet the patient and family needs. 2. Record review of Patient #108 showed that hospice services started on 06/27/25. Hospice aide services were ordered with frequencies of 2 visits every week for 12 weeks starting 06/25/25. The following hospice aide missed visits showed:a. On 07/01/25, missed visit documentation showed Certified Nursing Assistant was sick.b. On 07/25/25, missed visit documentation showed Certified Nursing Assistant was sick.There was no other documentation to show the hospice aide missed visits were communicated to the patient and their representative. 3. On 08/28/25 at 10:30 AM, the Surveyor interviewed the agency’s Director of Clinical Services (Staff #114) regarding the reasons for the HA missed visit. Staff #114 acknowledged the findings and stated that the hospice aide caring for the Patient #108 required education on appropriate missed visit documentation. In addition, Staff #114 stated that they were unable to provide documentation to show that the patient and their representative were contacted regarding the missed visits.”

    Rule L0547. Standard-level.

The one inspection in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Aug 28, 2025Recertification inspection by the state4 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified hospice since Sep 11, 2020.
  • Ownership: for-profit.
  • No deficiency or on record in the last three years.
Source:

CMS, Hospice General Information. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Has anything been proven against it?

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospices, so none are shown.
  • 0 deficiencies cited in the last three years came from inspections that included a complaint investigation.
Source:

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Who does the caring?

  • From Medicare claims (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024): 9.9 nurse care minutes per routine home care day, 5.6% of skilled nursing minutes at weekends and a visit near death for 90.2% of patients who died.
  • Where its patients were cared for (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024): 44% at home, 43% in assisted living, 13% in a skilled nursing facility.
Source:

CMS, Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Staffing measures
MeasureThis provider
Nurse care minutes per routine home care day9.9 min
Skilled nursing minutes at weekends5.6%
Visits near death90.2% of patients who died

Who owns it?

  • Cornerstone Healthcare Inc. owns 100% directly since Dec 1, 2019.
  • 8 owners or officers are people: Cynthia Kral (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); Brent Mills (corporate officer, 0%); Emily M Savage (managing employee (under contract), 0%); Gurpreet Dhillon (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); Brent Guerisoli (corporate director, 0%); Kortney Petry (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); John Gochnour (corporate officer, 0%); Amber L Tueller (corporate officer, 0%).
  • No private-equity firm among the owners CMS lists.
  • No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
Source:

CMS, Hospice All Owners and Hospice Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Organisations CMS lists
OrganisationRoleShareSince
Cornerstone Healthcare Inc.Owns 5% or more directly100%Dec 1, 2019
The Pennant Group Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies100%Dec 1, 2019

What do families say?

  • Family caregivers rate it 5 of 5 in CMS’s survey (Oct 1, 2023 to Sep 30, 2025): 92% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 93% would definitely recommend it.
  • CMS’s Hospice Care Index: 9 of 10 (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
  • 99.4% of patients were assessed on all seven of CMS’s measures at the start of care (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025); 57.9% had visits from a nurse or social worker on at least 2 of their last 3 days (Jan 1, 2023 to Dec 31, 2024).
Source:

CMS, CAHPS Hospice Survey and Hospice Provider Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Ratings and measures, as published
MeasureRating
Family caregiver survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of patients’ family caregivers, 1 to 55 of 5
Hospice Care IndexCMS’s Hospice Care Index, 0 to 10 (higher is better): a point for each of ten measures from Medicare claims on which the hospice meets CMS’s threshold9 of 10

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 13 hospices CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 98208, where this hospice’s office is, the middle number of deficiencies cited in the last three years was 2.5; this one had 4.
Source:

CMS, Hospice ZIP Data. Released Aug 26, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR hospice inspection reports. Released Oct 23, 2026. Updated quarterly.

What the record doesn’t say

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospices, so none are shown.
  • Only complaints that led to a citation appear; complaints that didn’t aren’t published.
  • CMS ended its Special Focus Program for hospices with serious problems on Feb 14, 2025, so no hospice is marked as one.
  • Hospice quality measures have a gap from October 2025: CMS replaced its patient assessment then, and public results from the new one (HOPE) are expected around November 2027.

Sources

If you believe something here is wrong, a correction starts with the agency whose record this copies: CMS. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare. If Hearth Record copied something wrongly, it will fix it and log the correction publicly, with its date: how corrections work.

Source:

This copy of the record was made on Oct 27, 2026.

From the hospice

The public record above comes first. Anything the hospice adds will appear here, below it, and say who wrote it.

Replies

None. Replies aren’t open yet. When they open, the hospice will be able to answer any finding for free, and the reply will show beside that finding, unedited and dated.

Paid listing

None. Paid listings aren’t open yet. When they open, anything paid for will say “Paid by the hospice”, and paying will never change a finding, a rating or the order of results.

How to read a record

Four things every record does, shown on an example record made up for this guide.

An example record, made up for this guide

An example nursing home

Made up for this guide: no real place is shown

Not fully inspected in over two years (CMS flag)

11 health citations at the latest inspection cycle

The state average is 14.3.

Source:

CMS, State and US Averages and Health Deficiencies. Released Oct 28, 2026. Updated monthly.

From the homeNone yet. Replies and paid listings aren’t open, and when they open they will sit here, below the record.

1 of 4

Every fact names its source.

Who published it, when, and how often it changes sit beside each fact, with a link to the agency’s own file.

Sign in

A free account keeps your watch list, shortlists, comparisons and saved searches on every device, and can email you when something you watch changes. Browsing never needs one.