Handmaker Home For The Aging
2221 North Rosemont Boulevard, Tucson, AZ 85712 · Non profit - Other · 94 certified beds · (520) 881-2323 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- CMS has flagged it for abuse
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Apr 2026
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (36) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (68%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 3.1% | 10.7% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.1% | 5.3% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.6% | 0.8% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.2% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 3.9% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.9% | 2.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 11.7% | 12.8% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 11.6% | 21.0% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.4% | 94.6% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.3% | 4.4% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 20.4% | 20.6% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.9% | 10.6% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.2% | 1.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 93.4% | 87.3% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 18.8% | 23.7% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 16.6% | 10.4% | 12.0% | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
57.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 95 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 75.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 48 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.45 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 75% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 32% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 57.8%CMS range 48.7–65.7 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.1%CMS range 6.4–16.1 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 75.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 75.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 60.4% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 97.3% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 8.0%CMS range 4.4–12.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.01 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 94 beds and averages 76.6 residents a day — about 81% occupied, or roughly 17 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.90 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.39 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.17 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.55 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.04 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.42 to 0.32 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 68% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
36 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 26 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-15 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews and review of facility policy and procedures, the facility failed to ensure one out of three samples residents (#1) remained free from self-harm by failing to immediately assess, report, investigate, and implement protective interventions after staff observed injuries. The deficient practice could delay in identification of resident's suicide attempt and could place residents at risk for continued self harm, serous injury or death. Findings Include:Resident #1 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses that included acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, heart failure, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, muscle weakness, reduced mobility, gout, depression, hyperlipidemia, and hypertension.A care plan initiated on February 09, 2026, identified a communication problem related to a hearing deficit and included interventions to anticipate and meet needs, discuss with the resident/family concerns or feelings regarding communication difficulties, encourage…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-15 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, facility investigation review, and review of facility policies and procedures, the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation into neglect involving one of the three sampled residents (#1). The deficient practice could lead to failure in preventing further potential neglect. Findings Include: Resident #1 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses that included acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, heart failure, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, muscle weakness, reduced mobility, gout, depression, hyperlipidemia, and hypertension. A care plan dated February 9, 2026, identified communication impairment related to hearing deficit and included interventions for communication support, safety monitoring and cognitive observation. A Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating Resident #1 was cognitively intact. An incident note dated February 25, 2026, at 3:54 PM…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-23 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, and review of facility documentation and policies, the facility failed to protect the rights of one resident (#54) to be free from physical abuse by another resident (#13). The deficient practice could result in further physical abuse of residents when appropriate actions are not taken.Findings Include:-Regarding Resident #13 (alleged perpetrator):Resident #13 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia, major depressive disorder, and anxiety disorder.The care plan dated October 2, 2025, revealed that the resident has a behavior problem of making sexually inappropriate comments to female staff and persistent yelling out, verbal and physical aggression toward staff during care related to Dementia. The interventions included to administer medications as ordered, and monitor and document for side effects and effectiveness; anticipate and meet the resident's needs; intervene as necessary to protect the rights and safety of others;…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, and review of facility documentation and policies, the facility failed to ensure that one resident (Resident #99) was provided adequate supervision and interventions to prevent a preventable fall. The deficient practice places residents at risk for falls with serious injury.Findings Include:Resident # 99 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with the most recent admission on [DATE]. The resident has diagnoses that consist of: type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications, other acute osteomyelitis, right ankle and foot, spinal stenosis, cervical region, major depressive disorder, recurrent, unspecified Bipolar disorder, current episode depressed, severe, without psychotic features. Acquired absence of the left leg below the knee. Morbid (severe) obesity due to excess calories. The record revealed that the resident's Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) score was 15 that indicated the resident is cognitively intact. No behaviors or moods were noted.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, facility documentation, and review of facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure that enhanced barrier precautions(EBP) were followed during wound care for one resident(#6). The deficient practice could result in the spread of infection.Findings include:Resident # 6 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage, age related osteoporosis, major depressive disorder, and need for assistance with personal care. An order initiated on February 5, 2025 revealed that Resident # 6 was on enhanced barrier precautions due to a left thigh wound. Review of care plan initiated on June 4, 2025 revealed that the resident had a stage 4 pressure ulcer with tunneling to left hip due to poor mobility. The interventions included to provide local wound care as prescribed and use of proper infection control measures such as hand hygiene and the use of personal protective equipment. An order initiated on January 5, 2026 for wound…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-24 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, facility documentation, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #1) was free from abuse by staff members (Staff #163 and Staff #202). The deficient practice could result in other residents being abused. Findings include:-Regarding Resident #1Resident #1 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses that include unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance, Bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, and anxiety disorder. A comprehensive care plan initiated on January 27, 2023 revealed that the resident had behavior problems using abusive language, yelling, screaming, and threatening behavior related to dementia, bipolar disorder, and anxiety. The care plan also revealed that the resident refuses to ask for help when transferring, causing multiple falls. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12, indicating moderate cognitive…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-12 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, facility documentation, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure 2 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #1 and #4) was free from abuse by another staff member & another resident (Staff #201 and Resident #5). The deficient practice could result in other residents being abused.Findings include:Regarding Resident #1:Resident # 1 (alleged victim) was re-admitted [DATE] with diagnoses that included hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease, morbid obesity, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and unspecified dementia.A comprehensive care plan initiated on August 15, 2025, revealed that the resident had an activity of daily living (ADL) performance deficit due to impaired balance and limited mobility. An admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 10 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS also revealed that the resident was dependent on staff for toileting hygiene and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-19 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a closed clinical record review, interviews, facility documentation, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure that abnormal respiratory rates for resident #7 were monitored and that a change in condition was relayed to the physician. The deficient practice could result in resident injury if abnormal vitals are neglected. Findings include: Resident #7 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, atrial fibrillation, obstructive sleep apnea, scoliosis, kyphosis-cervical region, heart failure, asthma, type 2 diabetes, morbid obesity, muscle weakness and reduced mobility. It was noted that the resident died on [DATE] while at the facility. A review of the admission MDS (minimum data set) dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS (brief interview of mental status) score of 15. The MDS further revealed no evidence of delirium, psychosis or behaviors. An admit summary note on [DATE] revealed that the resident had been admitted to Banner hospital for shortness of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-01-22 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews, clinical record review and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure that resident #16 was provided with assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) to maintain personal hygiene. Failure to meet this requirement could lead to issues with skin integrity and impairing resident dignity. Findings include: Resident #16 was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses of dementia, Bipolar disorder and Major Depressive Disorder. An quarterly Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] included that this resident was severely cognitively impaired and was dependent for showering/bathing self and dependant for the ability to get in or out of a tub/shower. A care plan dated June 9, 2020 included that this resident has an ADL self-care deficit related to dementia. This care plan included that this resident will have all ADL's met with staff assistance daily. A review of facility records included that this resident received or was offered a shower 6 times in November 2023 (on the 2, 6, 9, 13, 16, and 27th), 3 times…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-22 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews, clinical record review and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure that an allegation of abuse was reported in a timely manner. Findings include: Resident #24 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of multiple fractures. An admission Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] included that this resident was cognitively intact. A care plan dated January 6, 2025 included the resident is independent for meeting emotional, intellectual, physical, and social needs. A social services note dated January 3, 2025 included, This writer met with resident andher daughter after receiving report that (a family member) was aggressively trying to get residents' debit card. (Family member) states she is trying to pay her mother's rent and it is on an app on her cell phone. Explained to (Family member) why we were there and that there was concern over how she was talking to (this resident) and her attempt to get money from (this resident). This writer talked to resident privately and asked if she feels safe…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 26 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-22 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews, clinical record review and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure that a thorough investigation was conducted for resident #21. Findings include: Resident #21 was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses of mild cognative impairment and major depressive disorder. An annual Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] included that this resident was cognitively intact and required extensive assistance with bed mobility, transfers, dressing and personal hygiene. A review of the SA complaint tracking system received October 23, 2023 by Long Term Care Licensing included that a family member is misappropriating the resident's finances and is not paying for bills nor equipment repairs. However, a five day report was not received for this incident. A request was made for the five day report on January 24, 2025 at 9:40 A.M. An interview was conducted with the Assistant Administrator (staff #35) on January 24, 2025 shortly after this request. This staff stated that they did not have a 5 day report for this…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-24 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, resident and staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that abuse policies were implemented for two resident to resident abuse incidents, one involving resident (#222) and(#169); and the other involving residents (#223) and (#49). This deficient practice could result in further instances of resident to resident abuse. -Regarding Residents #222 and #169 -Resident #222 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included unspecified dementia, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed that resident #222 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, which indicated intact cognitive impairment. The assessment also revealed that the resident was exhibiting behavioral symptoms including physical, verbal, and behaviors not directed towards others on one to three days, and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-10-24 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — patternTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, resident and staff interviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure that an incident involving abuse between resident (#222) and resident (#169) was reported accurately and in a timely manner, and, that an investigation of an allegation of abuse is reported within five (5) working days for two residents (#223 & #49). The deficient practice could result in further incidents of resident to resident abuse and allegations of abuse not being reported to the SA timely and accurately. Regarding Resident #222 and Resident #169: -Resident #222 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included unspecified dementia, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed that resident #222 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, which indicated intact cognitive impairment. -Resident #169…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-24 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to properly discard expired medication in the medication room. this deficient practice could result in expired medication to be administered to residents against professional standards. During a medication admission observation conducted on [DATE] at 7:10a.m. with Registered Nurse (RN/Staff #64), a controlled substance (Lyrica) had an unseal capsule taped behind the medication blister pack. The RN stated that it is not part of the facility best practice to have taped medication behind the medication blister pack during this observation. A follow up interview was conducted on [DATE] at 10:48 a.m with the Registered Nurse (RN/Staff #64) who stated that the risk of having medication taped back onto the blister pack can contaminate the medication. The RN also stated that it is not part of the facility process to have medication taped back onto the medication blister pack. During an Observation on [DATE] at 12:31PM with Registered Nurse…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-10-24 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that food was stored under sanitary conditions that maintained freshness in the kitchen and nourishment refrigerators. The deficient practice could result in potential foodborne illness. Findings include: On October 21, 2024 at 10:47 a.m. the initial tour of the kitchen was conducted with the Food Services Director (FSD/Staff#109) and the Food Services Assistant Manager (FSAM/Staff#181). During the tour of the large walk-in refrigerator and secondary walk-in fridge, the following food items were observed to be beyond their use by dates: -Six Gold's Horseradish sauces with a factory expiration label of September 28 2024. -One block of swiss cheese labeled 10-8-2024 to 10-14-2024. During the initial tour of the large walk-in and secondary refrigerators on October 21, 2024, the following items were opened and not dated or labeled according to when they were opened or expected to be discarded: -One salsa container -One apple juice package -One sour cream container Observation of the four…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-24 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, and the facilities policy, the facility failed to ensure one resident (resident #2) was informed of the risks and benefits of and had consented to the usage of a psychotropic medication. This deficient practice could result in further violations of resident rights. Findings include: Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnosis that included Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar Type Major Depressive Disorder, Recurrent, Unspecified; Unspecified Dementia, Psychotic Disturbance, Mood Disturbance, Anxiety, Unspecified Psychosis, and Bipolar Disorder. A Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed the resident had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 14, which indicated the resident had no cognitive impairment. A physician's order dated April 17, 2024, revealed an order for Sertraline 200mg (milligrams) by mouth one time a day for depression. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for April 2024 through…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-24 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, resident and staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure two residents (#222) was free from abuse by another resident (#169). This deficient practice could result in further incidents of resident to resident abuse. -Resident #222 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included unspecified dementia, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A care plan revised on October 22, 2021 revealed a focus related to a history of behavior problems with an intervention to place her in a secured memory care unit and administer medications as ordered. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed that resident #222 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, which indicated intact cognitive impairment. The assessment also revealed that the resident was exhibiting behavioral symptoms including physical, verbal, and behaviors…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-24 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure one Resident (#2) with a diagnosis of a serious mental illness was referred to the appropriate state-designated mental health or intellectual disability authority for review. The deficient practice could result in necessary specialized services not being provided in accordance with professional standards. Findings include: Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnosis that included Schizoaffective Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, Dementia, Psychotic Disturbance, Mood Disturbance, anxiety, psychosis, Bipolar Disorder with Psychotic Features. A Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed the resident had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score of 14, which indicated the resident had no cognitive impairement A physician's order dated April 1, 2024, revealed an order for Seroquel 100mg (milligrams) by mouth one time at bedtime for bipolar disorder. A physician's order dated April 1,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-24 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, and policies and procedures, the facility failed to ensure that a comprehensive person-centered care plan with interventions was developed for one resident (#225). This deficient practice could result in further care plan's not being updated timely in accordance with professional standards. Resident #225 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE]. She was later re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including COPD, acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, and history of falling. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, indicating intact cognition. The MDS also revealed that the resident was taking an anticoagulant medication. Review of the comprehensive care plan, initiated August 20, 2024, revealed no focus regarding anticoagulant usage or interventions regarding anticoagulant usage. Review of physician orders revealed an order dated August 22, 2024 for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-24 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff and resident interviews, and observation of current facility practice, the facility failed to ensure nutritional status was assessed and managed in accordance with facility policy for one resident (#60). The deficient practice could result in a decline in nutritional status being missed and untreated for other residents. Resident #60 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including major depressive disorder, muscle weakness (generalized), and essential hypertension. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating the resident had no cognitive impairments. The MDS also revealed the resident had no issues with swallowing or chewing food, and no weight loss or weight gain had been noted. Review of the care plan, initiated July 3, 2024, revealed a focus that the resident had nutritional risk related to abdominal aortic aneurysm, depression, HTN, and adult malnutrition score 7.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-24 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews and facility documentation, the facility failed to ensure one resident (# 32) received dialysis care consistent with professional standards. This deficient practice could result in residents not being provided with necessary treatment in accordance with professional standards. Findings include: Resident #32 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including stage 4 chronic kidney disease, dependence on renal dialysis, respiratory failure, and type 1 diabetes. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated intact cognition. Active diagnoses included renal insufficiency or end-stage renal disease (ESRD), and dependence on renal dialysis. A Care plan dated February 13, 2024, revealed that the resident needs dialysis for renal failure and interventions included: to monitor/document/report for any signs/symptoms of infection to the access site. Review of physician orders…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-24 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews, personnel record review, facility assessment review, and facility policies, the facility failed to ensure 2 out of 6 sampled nursing staff (staff #6 and #82) possessed the competencies and skills needed to care for residents' needs. The deficient practice could result in delayed care and inadequate care for residents. Findings include: Review of the Facility Assessment with an updated date of August 2024, stated that the staff competencies needed to care for residents would hand hygiene, infection control procedures, bloodborne pathogens and exposure, resident rights and elder justice, communicating respectfully weight the residents, prohibition of photo/audio recordings, social media, emergency preparedness, workplace violence, dietary needs and kosher restrictions, dementia & Alzheimer's crisis intervention, sexual harassment, harassment and discrimination, privacy & HIPAA compliance, emergency procedures and fire safety, bullying-abuse, staff sensitivity towards residents, fire safety, medication administration, medication error prevention, understanding and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-24 · tag F0743 — isolatedEnsure that a resident does not develop patterns of decreased social interaction and/or increased withdrawn, angry, or depressive behaviors, unless unavoidable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, closed record review and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure a sampled resident (#219) received behavioral health services when resident reported concerns and grievances to staff for one of one sampled resident. This deficient practice can result in lasting emotional disturbance for the resident. Findings include, Resident #219 Resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with the diagnoses that included rheumatoid arthritis, spinal stenosis, status post gallbladder removal, and muscle weakness. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS)assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which indicated no cognitive impairment. A Social Service note dated November 20, 2020 revealed She is very pleasant and cooperative towards others. She does not have a psychiatric related diagnosis. She is her own person and makes her own decisions. A progress note from a provider dated November 24, 2020 revealed resident statement of Oh, it's nice to meet you!…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-24 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, facility documentation, staff interview, policy review, the facility failed to ensure to include procedures that medication were recorded accurate to professional standard of care. During an observation on October 14, 2024 at 7:25AM on Unit Golding medication cart the Narcotic Count Sheet sheet revealed that there were days where Out-Going Nurse signature was missing with an In-coming nurse signature missing. The record was not recorded properly in the the following days for: September 5, 2024 at 10:00 PM - 06:00 AM September 6, 2024 at 10:00 PM - 6:00 AM October 22, 2024 at 10:00 PM - 6:00 AM October 24, 2024 at 2:00 PM - 10:00 PM October 24.2024 at 10:00 PM - 6:00 AM An interview was conducted on October 14, 2024 at 7:25AM with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN/Staff # 76). The LPN stated that when administering narcotics one nurse will sign as out-going Nurse and the other nurse will sign as In-coming Nurse. (LPN/ Staff #76) stated that medications were not recorded properly for the above listed days. The LPN concluded that medication not recorded…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-24 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, interviews, and review of policies and procedures, the facility failed to reduce or discontinue anticoagulant therapy for Resident #325 in the presence of adverse consequences. This deficient practice can result in harm related to unnecessary medications. Findings include: -Resident #325 was admitted to the facility October 16, 2024, with the diagnoses of atrial fibrillation with thrombophilia (low platelet count), a history of colon cancer, and muscle weakness. According to the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE] resident scored 15 on the Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS) suggested resident was cognitively intact. A physician's order was written on October 16, 2024 to report to provider if signs and symptoms of bleeding, hemorrhage, or bruising occurred. A progress note dated October 19, 2024 stated dark stools were noted in toilet that day at 21:00. However, the morning and evening doses of Apixaban were given on the following day October 20, 2024, despite the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-24 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, clinical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate did not exceed 5%. The medication error rate was 6.9%. The deficient practice could result in additional medication errors. Finding include: -Resident #32 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including stage 4 chronic kidney disease, respiratory failure, and type 1 diabetes. The Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Briefs Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated intact cognition. A care plan initiated on September 09, 2024 revealed a focus for Diabetes Mellitus Type 1 with interventions for diabetes medication as ordered by doctors, and to monitor and document for side effects and effectiveness. A Physician's orders dated August 31, 2024 for Insulin Lispro Injection solution given based on the sliding scale. 60-199= 0 Units, Noftity MD if FSBS is less than 60, 200-249= 2 Units , 250 - 299= 4 Units, 300- 249= 6 Units, 350-400= 8 Units,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-24 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, staff interview, and review of policy and procedures the facility failed to ensure that one of one sampled residents (#32) was free from significant medication errors. The deficient practice could result in residents receiving unnecessary medication. Findings include: -Resident #32 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including stage 4 chronic kidney disease, respiratory failure, and type 1 diabetes. A quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated no cognitive impairment. A care plan initiated on September 09, 2024 revealed a focus for Diabetes Mellitus Type 1 with interventions that included to administer diabetes medication as ordered, and to monitor and document for side effects and effectiveness. A Physician's order dated August 31, 2024 for Insulin Lispro Injection solution as per sliding scale. -If 60-199= 0 Units, Notify MD if FSBS is less than 60, -200-249= 2 Units -250 - 299= 4…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-24 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on clinical record review, facility documentation, staff interview, policy review, the facility failed to ensure that glucometer controls were consistently completed. During an observation on October 23, 2024 at 12:41 p.m. with Registered Nurse (RN/staff #82) on Unit Rich with medication Cart 2 the Quality Control Record sheet had revealed that glucometer controls were not consistently completed. An interview was conducted on October 23, 2024 at 1:00 p.m. with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON/Staff #94). The ADON stated that glucometer quality controls were not consistently completed. An Interview was conducted on October 23, 2024 at 1:02 p.m. with the a Register Nurse (RN/Staff#112) The RN stated that the glucometer controls were not consistently completed on the following days in September 2024: 14,15,19,21,22, 26,27,28 and 29. The RN also stated glucometer controls were not consistently completed on the following days in August 2024: 1, 2, 11,25 and 31. The RN also stated glucometer controls were not completed on the following days in October 2024: 4,5,6,9,10,11,12,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, observations, interviews, and review of policy, the facility failed to appropriately implement their enhanced barrier precaution (EBP) program on two residents (#38 and #64). This deficient practice can result in harmful transmission of pathogens to other residents. Findings include, Regarding Resident #38 Resident # 38 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, Type 2 Diabetes, and open wound infection of the right artificial knee. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, which suggested the resident has intact cognitive ability. The MDS also reveals the resident is receiving care for a surgical wound and is currently receiving Intravenous (IV) medications. The order summary report revealed the resident's peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) interventions began on September 21, 2024 The order summary report revealed wound care began on the right knee…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-04 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, clinical record reviews, resident and staff interviews, and facility documentation, policy and procedures, the facility failed to ensure 3 residents (#5, 24, 40) were free from preventable falls. The deficient practice put the residents at increased risks for serious injury and harm. Findings include: -Regarding Resident #5: Resident #5 was admitted [DATE] with diagnoses of metabolic encephalopathy, Parkinson's, Dementia, and anxiety disorder. A MORSE fall scale (Fall Assessment tool) was conducted on 7/25, 7/31, 8/7, 8/13, 8/16 and 9/3/2024. All assessments include the resident was high risk for falling. A care plan focus dated 7/26/24 included that the resident is at high risk for falls related to confusion, deconditioning, history of falls and was unaware of safety needs. Interventions include following facility fall protocol, encouraging non skid socks while ambulating or in wheelchair, and placing the call light in reach and prompt response to requests for assistance. A progress note…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-20 · tag F0626 — isolatedPermit a resident to return to the nursing home after hospitalization or therapeutic leave that exceeds bed-hold policy.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, and policy reviews, the facility failed to ensure one resident (#60) was allowed to return to the facility following hospitalization. This deficient practice could result in unsafe discharges for future residents. Findings include: Resident #60 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia, bipolar disorder, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, spinal stenosis, and atrial fibrillation. Review of the quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment dated [DATE], revealed a BIMS (brief interview for mental status) score of 8, which indicated the resident had significant cognitive impairment. The discharge MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed that the resident had been discharged with return anticipated. A nursing progress note dated June 8, 2024 revealed the resident was being sent out emergently via 911 because of altered mental status and labored breathing. An interview was conducted with hospital case manager (HCM/staff #15) on June…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-09-28 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, staff interviews, and policy, the facility failed to ensure multiple food items were stored in accordance with professional standards and wet cleaning rags were not left on the top of counters or carts. The deficient practice could result in placing residents at risk for food-borne illnesses. Findings include: A kitchen and food storage observation were conducted September 25, 2023 at 8:26 a.m. with the food services director (staff #90). There were 2 plastic packages of strawberries, 2 packages of blackberries, 4 packages of raspberries and 3 green peppers with multiple grey fuzzy growths on the surface of individual fruits in each of these packages found inside the refrigerator. There were also 3 cucumbers that were misshapen, partially desiccated and extremely soft (mushy) to the touch. During the same observation on September 25, 2023 at 8:26 a.m. a wet cleaning rag was observed on the top of a food cart. In another observation conducted on September 26, 2023 at 10:17 a.m. there was a wet cleaning rag on top of a food preparation counter. A nutritional…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — isolatedHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on resident and staff interviews, facility documentation, policy and procedures, the facility failed to act upon grievances voiced during resident council meetings. The facility census was 73. The deficient practice could result in residents' concerns, views, grievances or recommendations not being considered or acted upon. Findings include: Review of the resident council meeting minutes for the past 6 months revealed inconsistent documentation of facility actions/response or communication to residents related to issues or concerns voiced or brought up during the resident council meetings. A resident council meeting was conducted on September 26, 2023 at 1:30 p.m. with four (#49, #21, #5 and #35) alert and oriented residents. One resident stated that concerns voiced to the facility were heard but not always acted upon; and/or facility missed providing status updates regarding the concerns to the resident council. Two residents said that the facility had not reported back on several issues to include having live or artificial plants in the common areas, independent wheelchair…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-28 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews and review of facility policy and procedure, the facility failed to ensure that one resident (#21) was appropriately transferred using a mechanical lift. The deficient practice could result in preventable accidents such as falls. Findings include: Resident #21 was admitted with diagnoses of hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], included a Brief interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating the resident was cognitively intact. The assessment also included that the resident required an extensive 2 person assist for transfers. A care plan included the resident had an Activities of Daily Living (ADL) self-care performance deficit; and that, the resident had hemiplegia affecting the left side related to cerebrovascular accident. Interventions included the resident required 2 staff for all care related to accusations against others and to assist with ADL's and locomotion as…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-28 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolatedEnsure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on staff interviews, and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure that one agency staff (#81) had appropriate competency and skill sets necessary to transfer one resident (#21) using a sit to stand lift. The deficient practice could result in resident injury and staff not having the skills to provide the care the resident needs. Findings include: Resident #21 was admitted with diagnoses of hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], included a Brief interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating the resident was cognitively intact. The assessment also included that the resident required an extensive 2 person assist for transfers. A care plan included the resident had an Activities of Daily Living (ADL) self-care performance deficit; and that, the resident had hemiplegia affecting the left side related to cerebrovascular accident. Interventions included the resident required 2 staff for all care related to accusations…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-28 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, and review of facility policy and procedure, the facility failed to ensure pain medication was administered according to physician ordered parameters for one resident (#67). The deficient practice could result in residents receiving unnecessary medication and adverse side effects. Findings include: Resident #67 was admitted [DATE], with diagnoses of chronic pain syndrome, major depressive disorder, and diabetic neuropathy. The physician order dated July 14, 2023, included the following: - Acetaminophen (analgesic). Give 650 milligrams (mg) by mouth every 6 hours as needed for pain 1-3 NTE (not to exceed) 3 gm (grams) in 24 hours; - Oxycodone (opioid) 5 mg. Give two tablets by mouth every 4 hours as needed for severe pain 8-10; and, - Oxycodone 5 mg. Give one tablet by mouth every 4 hours as needed for moderate pain 4-7. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 which indicates…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to POLLAK HOLDINGS — 6 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 1.6 | +1.4 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 1.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 1.5 | +1.5 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 3.0 | +2.0 vs chain |
The other 5 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.6★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASH, BRUCE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 02/22/2021 |
| WEXLER, ALLISON | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 09/21/2014 |
| BREGMAN, PHILIP | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 09/21/2014 |
| KOHN, BRIAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 02/22/2021 |
| POLLAK, ELIE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/19/2021 |
| WISSINGER, TRAVIS | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/19/2021 |
| HANDMAKER JEWISH SERVICES FOR THE AGING | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/18/2024 |
| BASTIAMPILLAI, NICHOLAS | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/15/2025 |
| DORF, RACHEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 02/19/2021 |
| GOODING, EMERSON | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 07/30/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in AZ
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Arizona Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 035016. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-23, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.