We publish the numbers because skeptical referral sources — therapists, primary care providers, EAPs — need clinical credibility before they send a patient anywhere. No competitor in Seattle publishes outcomes data. Here is ours.
We deliberately do not report a single cure-rate endpoint. Addiction and mental health recovery are ongoing clinical processes, and the relevant question is not "did the patient stay sober forever" — that framing helps no one and rewards programs that lose contact with patients after discharge. The relevant question is what the trajectory looks like at clinically meaningful intervals, what the program is doing to influence it, and how the data is collected. Below are the four headline metrics we report across all three programs (Residential, Intensive Outpatient, Sober Living).
Program completion, length of stay, psychiatric symptom reduction (PHQ-9, GAD-7), co-occurring disorder stabilization, and medication-assisted treatment retention where initiated. Collected by the primary clinical team and audited monthly by an internal clinical review board that is not involved in direct patient care.
90-day, 6-month, and 12-month post-discharge contact with every patient who consents to follow-up — random toxicology screening, check-ins with the assigned aftercare clinician, and structured re-engagement when the trajectory is decaying. We publish the contact rate itself, not just the outcome, because a metric with no denominator is not a metric.
Alumni engagement in ongoing programming, family program completion rates, relapse events captured through re-admission rather than lost to follow-up, and — this matters — what fraction of patients we lose contact with entirely. The gap between the two is the part of the work we still need to do, and we name it out loud.
Most treatment-center marketing avoids numbers entirely, or reports a single cure-rate figure that nobody can audit. We do not do either. A "graduated" patient is not a recovered patient. A patient who finished a 30-day residential has not finished recovery — they have finished a phase of it, and the next phase is the one that determines whether the work holds. The clinical literature is unambiguous on this point. Ninety days is the highest-risk window for relapse. Six months is when the support structure has to be load-bearing on its own. Twelve months is when the recovery is genuinely sustainable, and even then the work continues.
What "ongoing progress" means operationally. We measure symptom trajectories, not snapshot scores. The same PHQ-9 read at intake and at discharge is less informative than a trajectory of PHQ-9 reads across the treatment episode — because the patient who improved from severe to moderate over 30 days is in a different clinical position than the patient who plateaued at moderate and stayed there. The first trajectory is a program that worked. The second is a program that held the patient while the work stalled, which is something we flag and respond to during the episode, not after.
Relapse as a system event, not a verdict. We do not report relapse rates as a single percent because doing so collapses two very different phenomena into the same number. A patient who relapsed in week 2 and re-engaged by week 6 is a program that caught the trajectory. A patient who relapsed at month 8 and disengaged from care is a program that lost the patient. We report the rate of the first because that number measures the systems we built, and we report the rate of the second because that number measures the gap in what we built. The flat "cure rate" you see in industry marketing is what allows programs to dodge both.
What we are still measuring. Longer-horizon outcomes — 24-month and 5-year post-discharge — require follow-up infrastructure we are still building. We will publish those numbers as they become available, with the same denominator transparency we apply to the current ones. A number we are not ready to defend is not a number we will put in front of a referral source who is deciding whether to trust us with a patient.
If you are a therapist, primary care provider, EAP coordinator, or clinical professional considering us for a patient you know personally — request the full outcomes dossier. We will share methodology, source data, and the raw denominator math. No brochure. No sales call. Just the data a clinician needs to make the referral.
Verify outcomes for your referral →