Competency Restoration Observatory
↓ Download CSV (1037 rows)
HomeWashingtonOregonColoradoTexasCaliforniaCompareDataChangelogAbout

Restoration wait times, month by month

Statewide inpatient competency restoration: the percent of monthly court orders resolved within 7 days of signature, and the median wait among them. "Resolved" includes hospital admission, order dismissal or withdrawal, and jail release without admission — not admission alone; see the measurement notes below. Compared against the deadlines set in Trueblood v. DSHS.

Built and maintained by Sudhanshu Rai, an independent researcher; not affiliated with any court, agency, or party. Descriptive measurement only — no causal claims. Not legal advice — nothing here states your legal rights or deadlines in any individual case, or reaches a conclusion about any party's compliance, liability, or wrongdoing; consult a licensed attorney about a specific matter.

Governing order: federal consent decree, Trueblood v. DSHS (W.D. Wash.), with an active court monitor. Standard: 7 days from court order signature to admission (this page's strictest published clock-start), with two looser published alternatives shown in the verification detail below.
Get the data

Download the dataset behind this page

Every chart above is a view on this data, not the other way around.

Washington1037 rows · 17 columns · 2018-01–2026-05
↓ Download CSV Full schema & more →
Resolved within 7 days, May 2026
95%
Strictest of 3 published clock-start definitions; see verification detail below.
Source: Trueblood-Report-2026-06.pdf — Table 11, page.37 ↗
Median wait, May 2026
5days
Among orders resolved that month.
Source: Trueblood-Report-2026-06.pdf — Table 11, page.37 ↗
Reports covered
75
Feb 2018–May 2026
Primary series

Percent of monthly orders resolved within 7 days of signature

Every point is one month's own rate — not a rolling average. The shaded band marks the site's own auto-detected shift point (first run of 3+ consecutive months at or above 70%) — a disclosed, mechanical rule re-evaluated on every rebuild, not a permanent classification or an editorial judgment about when things "got better."

0%25%50%75%100%2024-04–2026-052018-02: 9% — Trueblood-Report-2019-03.pdf — Table 3c, page.152018-03: 9% — Trueblood-Report-2019-03.pdf — Table 3c, page.152018-04: 8% — Trueblood-Report-2019-05.pdf — Table 3c, page.152018-05: 9% — Trueblood-Report-2019-06.pdf — Table 3c, page.152018-06: 7% — Trueblood-Report-2019-07.pdf — Table 3c, page.152018-07: 10% — Trueblood-Report-2019-08.pdf — Table 3c, page.162018-08: 18% — Trueblood-Report-2019-08.pdf — Table 3c, page.162018-09: 13% — Trueblood-Report-2019-10.pdf — Table 10, page.162018-10: 15% — Trueblood-Report-2019-11.pdf — Table 10, page.162018-11: 0% — Trueblood-Report-2019-12.pdf — Table 10, page.162018-12: 29% — Trueblood-Report-2020-01.pdf — Table 10, page.172019-01: 24% — Trueblood-Report-2020-02.pdf — Table 10, page.182019-02: 23% — Trueblood-Report-2020-02.pdf — Table 10, page.182019-03: 20% — Trueblood-Report-2020-02.pdf — Table 10, page.182019-04: 29% — Trueblood-Report-2020-02.pdf — Table 10, page.182019-05: 19% — Trueblood-Report-2020-06.pdf — Table 10, page.202019-06: 18% — Trueblood-Report-2020-07.pdf — Table 10, page.202019-07: 23% — Trueblood-Report-2020-07.pdf — Table 10, page.202019-08: 26% — Trueblood-Report-2020-07.pdf — Table 10, page.202019-09: 22% — Trueblood-Report-2020-10.pdf — Table 10, page.232019-10: 26% — Trueblood-Report-2020-11.pdf — Table 10, page.232019-11: 26% — Trueblood-Report-2020-12.pdf — Table 10, page.222019-12: 28% — Trueblood-Report-2021-01.pdf — Table 10, page.222020-01: 9% — Trueblood-Report-2021-01.pdf — Table 10, page.222020-02: 10% — Trueblood-Report-2021-03.pdf — Table 10, page.212020-03: 8% — Trueblood-Report-2021-04.pdf — Table 10, page.212020-04: 11% — Trueblood-Report-2021-05.pdf — Table 10, page.212020-05: 0% — Trueblood-Report-2021-06.pdf — Table 10, page.212020-06: 4% — Trueblood-Report-2021-07.pdf — Table 10, page.212020-07: 5% — Trueblood-Report-2021-08.pdf — Table 10, page.212020-08: 6% — Trueblood-Report-2021-09.pdf — Table 10, page.212020-09: 7% — Trueblood-Report-2021-10.pdf — Table 10, page.212020-10: 12% — Trueblood-Report-2021-11.pdf — Table 10, page.212020-11: 14% — Trueblood-Report-2021-12.pdf — Table 10, page.212020-12: 9% — Trueblood-Report-2022-01.pdf — Table 10, page.212021-01: 8% — Trueblood-Report-2022-02.pdf — Table 10, page.232021-02: 14% — Trueblood-Report-2022-03.pdf — Table 10, page.232021-03: 9% — Trueblood-Report-2022-04.pdf — Table 10, page.232021-04: 12% — Trueblood-Report-2022-05.pdf — Table 10, page.232021-05: 14% — Trueblood-Report-2022-06.pdf — Table 10, page.232021-06: 2% — Trueblood-Report-2022-07.pdf — Table 10, page.232021-07: 6% — Trueblood-Report-2022-08.pdf — Table 10, page.232021-08: 7% — Trueblood-Report-2022-09.pdf — Table 10, page.232021-09: 12% — Trueblood-Report-2022-10.pdf — Table 10, page.232021-10: 5% — Trueblood-Report-2022-11.pdf — Table 10, page.232021-11: 10% — Trueblood-Report-2022-11.pdf — Table 10, page.232021-12: 7% — Trueblood-Report-2023-01.pdf — Table 10, page.232022-01: 5% — Trueblood-Report-2023-02.pdf — Table 10, page.232022-02: 6% — Trueblood-Report-2023-02.pdf — Table 10, page.232022-03: 6% — Trueblood-Report-2023-04.pdf — Table 10, page.232022-04: 3% — Trueblood-Report-2023-05.pdf — Table 10, page.232022-05: 7% — Trueblood-Report-2023-06.pdf — Table 10, page.242022-06: 11% — Trueblood-Report-2023-07.pdf — Table 10, page.242022-07: 3% — Trueblood-Report-2023-08.pdf — Table 10, page.242022-08: 6% — Trueblood-Report-2023-09.pdf — Table 10, page.242022-09: 5% — Trueblood-Report-2023-10.pdf — Table 10, page.242022-10: 4% — Trueblood-Report-2023-11.pdf — Table 10, page.242022-11: 5% — Trueblood-Report-2023-12.pdf — Table 10, page.242022-12: 1% — Trueblood-Report-2024-01.pdf — Table 10, page.242023-01: 3% — Trueblood-Report-2024-02.pdf — Table 10, page.242023-02: 5% — Trueblood-Report-2024-03.pdf — Table 10, page.242023-03: 6% — Trueblood-Report-2024-04.pdf — Table 10, page.242023-04: 5% — Trueblood-Report-2024-05.pdf — Table 10, page.242023-05: 6% — Trueblood-Report-2024-05.pdf — Table 10, page.242023-06: 6% — Trueblood-Report-2024-05.pdf — Table 10, page.242023-07: 5% — Trueblood-Report-2024-08.pdf — Table 10, page.242023-08: 5% — Trueblood-Report-2024-09.pdf — Table 10, page.242023-09: 7% — Trueblood-Report-2024-10.pdf — Table 10, page.252023-10: 6% — Trueblood-Report-2024-11.pdf — Table 11, page.252023-11: 7% — Trueblood-Report-2024-12.pdf — Table 11, page.352023-12: 4% — Trueblood-Report-2025-01.pdf — Table 11, page.352024-01: 13% — Trueblood-Report-2025-02.pdf — Table 11, page.352024-02: 25% — Trueblood-Report-2025-03.pdf — Table 11, page.352024-03: 30% — Trueblood-Report-2025-04.pdf — Table 11, page.352024-04: 87% — Trueblood-Report-2025-05.pdf — Table 11, page.352024-05: 86% — Trueblood-Report-2025-06.pdf — Table 11, page.352024-06: 76% — Trueblood-Report-2025-07.pdf — Table 11, page.352024-07: 89% — Trueblood-Report-2025-08.pdf — Table 11, page.362024-08: 89% — Trueblood-Report-2025-09.pdf — Table 11, page.372024-09: 91% — Trueblood-Report-2025-10.pdf — Table 11, page.372024-10: 91% — Trueblood-Report-2025-11.pdf — Table 11, page.372024-11: 77% — Trueblood-Report-2025-12.pdf — Table 11, page.372024-12: 86% — Trueblood-Report-2025-12.pdf — Table 11, page.372025-01: 88% — Trueblood-Report-2026-02.pdf — Table 11, page.372025-02: 88% — Trueblood-Report-2026-03.pdf — Table 11, page.382025-03: 95% — Trueblood-Report-2026-04.pdf — Table 11, page.382025-04: 97% — Trueblood-Report-2026-05.pdf — Table 11, page.372025-05: 93% — Trueblood-Report-2026-06.pdf — Table 11, page.372025-06: 90% — Trueblood-Report-2026-06.pdf — Table 11, page.372025-07: 92% — Trueblood-Report-2026-06.pdf — Table 11, page.372025-08: 93% — Trueblood-Report-2026-06.pdf — Table 11, page.372025-09: 94% — Trueblood-Report-2026-06.pdf — Table 11, page.372025-10: 97% — Trueblood-Report-2026-06.pdf — Table 11, page.372025-11: 98% — Trueblood-Report-2026-06.pdf — Table 11, page.372025-12: 91% — Trueblood-Report-2026-06.pdf — Table 11, page.372026-01: 90% — Trueblood-Report-2026-06.pdf — Table 11, page.372026-02: 93% — Trueblood-Report-2026-06.pdf — Table 11, page.372026-03: 91% — Trueblood-Report-2026-06.pdf — Table 11, page.372026-04: 93% — Trueblood-Report-2026-06.pdf — Table 11, page.372026-05: 95% — Trueblood-Report-2026-06.pdf — Table 11, page.372018-022020-032022-042024-042026-0595%2026-05
75 monthly reports, Trueblood-Report-2026-06.pdf shown ↗
"Resolved" counts hospital admission, order dismissal/withdrawal, and jail release without admission identically — the source reports' own footnote definition, not this site's. A person still waiting as of a given report is excluded from that month's rate entirely (right-censoring) until their case resolves one way or another, which tends to flatter months with a growing backlog and understate true wait times in those months.

Median wait among resolved orders, May 2026: 5 days (peak 97 days, Mar 2023).

Cases still open past the source reports' own outlier threshold (the complement this rate excludes): 0 as of Apr 2026 (peak 482 open cases, longest wait 274 days, Nov 2022). Source: Trueblood-Report-2026-06.pdf ↗

Show verification detail — 3 published clock-start definitions
The monitor's reports publish three clock-start options for this same rate; none of the three is literally Washington's own statutory formula (the shorter of 7 days from DSHS's receipt of the order or 14 days from the court's signature, measured to an offer of admission) — this page uses the strictest of the three PUBLISHED options as a deliberately conservative choice, not because it is literally "the" legal deadline.
DefinitionClock starts atMay 2026 value
Strictest published (this page)Court order signature95%
Looser: from DSHS receiptDSHS receipt of order99%
Looser: from referralReferral to DSHS100%
N (orders completed, May 2026): 144.
Delay-reason coding — a separate dataset

Why DSHS says restoration was delayed

Coded instances span Mar 2020–Apr 2026 — overwhelmingly concentrated in the pre-turnaround years (see the chart above), not a live characterization of current practice.

Flagged — unresolved in the source data: of 6,370 coded restoration-delay instances (Mar 2020–Apr 2026, 72 monthly reports), DSHS's own coding attributes 90.0% to "bed availability" and 8.5% to "unknown." "Hospital staffing issues" and "Jail/Outside facility staffing issues" — both real categories in DSHS's own taxonomy — were used a combined 0 times, including in months whose own narrative sections describe an active staffing shortage. The two may not be in tension: a bed that can't be staffed may still get coded as a bed problem. RestoreWatch doesn't resolve which framing is correct; both figures are shown because both come from the same published source. Regenerating this figure from raw PDFs within this tree is a known follow-up — currently computed from a verified data copy, not yet independently re-derivable here.
Status

Data quality and reporting limitations

Washington's public record here is the densest of any state on this site: a real monthly series, re-derived from source PDFs by a public, re-executable pipeline, spanning Feb 2018–May 2026. Two disclosed exceptions, not one: (1) the delay-reason breakdown below the primary chart AND its censored-backlog figures, both currently verified data copies rather than independently re-derivable from raw PDFs within this tree yet -- see that card's own note; and (2) 23 facility/stage/setting-month combination(s), 2020-04 through 2025-06, dominated by OCRP/restoration/outpatient (22 of 23). Each was individually inspected against its source PDF: the table is found and its row for that month genuinely reads entirely "n/a" (zero completions that month), which this pipeline deliberately excludes rather than record as a false zero -- not backfilled by hand or guessed at, left as a genuine, computed gap. (A minority of individual monthly PDFs elsewhere in this corpus fail their own table extraction -- Washington republishes each month's data in roughly a dozen subsequent reports, and this pipeline keeps the newest successful read of a given month, so those failures don't currently show up as gaps here. The one case that couldn't self-heal this way -- the newest report, which no later report has re-covered yet -- has its own dedicated completeness check in this pipeline's build gate.)
Get the data

Download the dataset behind this page

Every chart above is a view on this data, not the other way around.

Washington1037 rows · 17 columns · 2018-01–2026-05
↓ Download CSV Full schema & more →
Use the data

Cite, download, or get in touch

Cite this dataset

Competency Restoration Observatory (2026). Washington restoration wait-time series [dataset]. competencyrestoration.org · data current through 2026-05 · page generated August 2026 · concept DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.21436450 (always resolves to the latest dataset version — a version-pinned DOI matching this exact data window follows at the next Zenodo release).

Every figure regenerates from the public source reports by code — fully reproducible. The Zenodo deposit already includes real, MIT-licensed extraction code for the frozen Washington/Oregon study (an extraction pipeline plus its own verification gate) — but this dashboard's own full 5-state codebase (adapted from that study's code, plus Colorado, Texas, and California from scratch) is a separate, not-yet-public repository. A dedicated "Build & Replicate" walkthrough page and that public release are both planned but not yet published.

Data, code & contact

Open dataset + WA/OR code (Zenodo) Full dashboard code (public release planned) Email the maintainer Subscribe to corrections (RSS)

Researchers, clinicians, monitors, and reporters welcome — especially if you know of more recent source reports for this state. Every correction to an already-published number is logged on the Changelog page and in this RSS feed — nothing changes silently.