No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Advanced Health Care Of Henderson

1285 E Cactus Avenue, Las Vegas, NV 89183 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 38 certified beds · (702) 790-6300 Medicare only — no Medicaid

Call the home — (702) 790-6300 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
1 actual-harm citation$8,018 in federal fines
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
Worth asking about
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • the CMS record shows $8,018 in federal fines (most recent 2024-07-23)
  • about 17% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 5 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Urgent care / clinic
3175 St Rose Pkwy · (702) 320-8111 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
3175 St Rose Pkwy · (702) 967-0500 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
10670 S Maryland Pkwy · (619) 499-1730 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
3215 St Rose Pkwy · (808) 631-9317

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
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 5 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.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.8%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.9%80.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission20.1%23.2%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit7.9%9.6%12.0%better

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.

68.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 488 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

68.3%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
54.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
1.43U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.72hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.66hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 54.9% 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 224 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 1.43 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 99% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 25% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF68.3%CMS range 64.1–71.951.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.8%CMS range 7.8–11.810.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge54.9%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge45.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge51.8%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 setting99.4%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 dischargenot 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 stay0.3%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization5.7%CMS range 3.9–7.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.041.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

2.33
RN hours/ resident / day
0.36
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.26
Aide hours/ resident / day
5.95
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
1.78
RN hoursweekends
37.7%
Total nursing turnover
22.2%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 38 beds and averages 36.9 residents a day — about 97% occupied, or roughly 1 bed typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 5.95 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 2.33 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.26 is at or above 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 5.03 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 6.32 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 2.55 to 1.78 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 38% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-07-18)
1
at the previous standard inspection (2024-07-23)

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

9 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Actual harm · Gdisputed · IIDR2024-07-23 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    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 record review, interviews, and document review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was protected from over sedation for one unsampled resident. The deficient practice led to resident being over sedated, requiring hospitalization. Findings include: Resident 25 (R25) R25 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic pain and body mass index 19.9 or less. A progress note dated 04/19/2024, documented R25 was sent to hospital after possible overdose, exhibiting signs and symptoms of altered mental status and did not respond after two (2) doses of naloxone (Narcan, drug to reverse effects of opioid medication) were given. A physician order dated 04/09/2024 documented to give Clonazepam 1 mg with special instruction of do not give in combination with opiate, may take at least two hours in between benzodiazepine and opiate administration, avoid over sedation. The medication administration record indicated the following medications were given in the morning on 04/19/2024: - Citalopram 40 mg at…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-07-23 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    Procure 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 observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure food stored inside the walk-in freezer were labeled with a date and time, a label was changed to reflect the appropriate date and time, a container of expired seasoning was discarded, a condiment squeeze bottle was labeled and a dietary aide did not touch and adjust their glasses several times during tray line for the lunch meal service. The deficient practices could have led to contamination of kitchen surfaces and food borne illness. Findings include: On 7/17/2024 in the morning, a brief kitchen tour revealed the following: -A condiment squeeze bottle containing a yellow substance stored on the counter was not labeled. The cook identified the substance as liquid butter. Walk-in Freezer #1 - Cottage Cheese 5 lb. container expired 7/5/2024 - Raw fish stored in container with label used by date 7/14/2024 - Gallon bag containing a corn meal type substance was not labeled. Walk-in Freezer #2 -Pan wrapped with aluminum foil contained approximately 2-3 slices of cheesecake was not labeled. Seasoning…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-07-21 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    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, interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure a physician order for self-administration was obtained and an assessment was completed before allowing the resident to self-administer the medications. This deficient practice could potentially lead to serious medication errors, adverse drug reactions, or other health complications for the resident. Findings include: Resident 23 (R23) R23 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including pleural effusion, muscle weakness and hypertension. The Brief Interview of Mental Status dated 06/29/2023, documented a score of 14/15, which means R23's cognitive status was intact. On 07/19/2023 at 9:22 AM, R23 was in the bathroom. There were three pills placed in the medication cup by R23's bedside. When R23 went back to the bed, R23 explained the medications were potassium, iron, and Lasix (diuretics). R23 indicated more medications were taken earlier and unassisted; the medications were self-administered per resident's request.…

    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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-07-21 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure 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 observation, interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure the fall mats were appropriately placed as ordered for a fall risk resident who had repeated falls, for 1 of 14 sampled residents (Resident 138). This deficient practice could potentially lead to serious injuries or further complications for the fall-risk resident, including fractures, head injuries, or other physical harm. Findings include: Resident 138 (R138) R138 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including Parkinson's disease, repeated falls, and rhabdomyolysis (breakdown of muscle tissue). The Brief Interview of Mental Status dated 07/10/2023, documented a score of 7/10, which means R138's cognitive status was severely impaired. A physician order dated 07/20/2023, documented fall precautions: bed in the lowest position, fall mat to be used while in bed, and frequent checks every 2-4 hours. A Care Plan dated 07/07/2023, documented R138 was at risk for falls related to impaired mobility, and an intervention…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-07-21 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    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, interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure: the indwelling (Foley) catheter order size was followed or clarified for two of 14 sampled residents (Residents 25 and 95), the urinary output was adequately monitored for a resident with a urinary indwelling catheter for one of 14 sampled residents (Resident 95); and the attending physician was notified regarding bladder scanner results above 400 milliliters for a resident with an indwelling catheter for one of 14 sampled residents (Resident 95). These deficient practices could potentially lead to complications, such as urinary tract infections, urinary retention, catheter-associated issues, urethral damage, leakage, and bladder kidney damage, and compromise the residents' overall health and well-being. Findings include: A facility policy titled Indwelling Urinary Catheter Site Care revised 12/19/2022, documented residents with indwelling urinary catheters would receive routine catheter care during daily care 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-07-21 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when 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 observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure an empty Oxygen (O2) humidifier bottle was changed as ordered / scheduled and appropriately documented in the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for 1 of 14 sampled residents (Resident 136). This deficient practice had the potential to lead to serious health consequences and compromising the resident's respiratory support and overall well-being. Findings include: R136 (R136) R136 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including long term use of anticoagulants and multiple myeloma A Physician order dated 07/04/2023, documented to change Oxygen tubing and humidifier bottle each week on Friday AM shift. Initial and date tubing and bottle when replaced. A Care Plan dated 07/04/2023, documented R136 was at risk of ineffective breathing pattern related to episode of shortness of breath while lying. The Medication Administration Record dated 07/14/2023, documented the humidifier bottle was changed. The humidifier…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-07-21 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management 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 record review, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure a pain assessment was performed and documented for the administration of pain medication prescribed as needed for 1 of 14 sampled residents (Resident #2). The deficient practice had the potential to lead to adverse physical and psychological resident outcomes affecting the recovery and interfering with the activities of daily living. Finding include: Resident #2 (R2) R2 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including recurrent intermittent falls in the past 2-years, history of bilateral knee surgery, lumbar spinal stenosis, chronic back pains, and history of lumbar spine surgery. On 07/19/2023 in the morning, R2 verbalized having pain often in the knees and low back and occasionally medications were not effective. R2's medical record documented the following orders for pain management: Hydrocodone-acetaminophen 10-325 milligrams (mg) 1 tablet orally every four hours as needed for pain scale four to ten (4-10) ordered on…

    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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-07-21 · tag F0847 — isolated
    Inform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
    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 interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure a patient with cognitive impairment did not sign an arbitration agreement for 1 of 14 sampled residents (Resident #95). The deficient practice had the potential to deny the residents and/or surrogates their right to resolve their disputes in a court of law. Findings include: Resident #95 (R95) R95 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including dementia, urinary retention, anemia, urinary tract infection. Arbitration agreement document dated 07/12/2023, revealed R95 signed the document. On 07/20/2023, R95's representative explained the resident was not capable to perform decision-making tasks due to the impaired cognition and the arbitration agreement document should have been discussed and signed by the representative. On 07/20/2023 at 4:00 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) explained documents were given by admission staff to sign at the date of admission. The DON acknowledged R95 had impaired cognition and the arbitration…

    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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · C2025-07-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, the facility failed to ensure the Water Management Plan included all relevant actions to prevent, identify, and address the growth and spread of Legionella and other waterborne illnesses.Findings include:A review of the facility's Water Management Plan, titled Risk Management Plan for Legionella Control (undated), revealed the plan included a hazard identification and risk assessment which listed possible general events which could compromise water safety and result in circumstances that would be beneficial for the growth of microbes that cause waterborne diseases. The assessment did not include measures to prevent the growth of waterborne pathogens and how to monitor the pathogens. A review of the documentation indicated the only measure being monitored was water temperature.Documentation indicated the facility had conducted monthly water temperature monitoring at various points in the facility utilizing the Water Management Observation Log. The Log provided a way to document the water temperatures and locations where the water temperatures were taken from.…

    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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has no plan of correction

“Disputed” is CMS’s own flag, not our reading: the CMS deficiency file records whether the home has formally contested a citation, and we reproduce that. IDR is Informal Dispute Resolution, run by the state survey agency that wrote the citation; IIDR is Independent Informal Dispute Resolution, a separate process before an outside entity, available when CMS has proposed a civil money penalty. They are different processes and we mark them differently. Two things to hold at once. A disputed citation is still a citation — it was written by a surveyor, it stands on the record unless and until it is changed, and we neither hide it nor discount it. And we cannot tell you how the dispute came out: CMS publishes that a citation is under dispute, not the outcome, so a tag marked here may since have been upheld, reduced, or deleted, and an unmarked tag may have been disputed and resolved before this file was cut. Ask the home what it disputed and why — it is entitled to tell you, and the answer is often the most informative thing on this page.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$8,018 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $8,018 — penalty dated 2024-07-23

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ADVANCED HEALTH CARE — 26 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 54.8+0.2 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 54.2+0.8 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 54.1≈ chain avg
Quality measures 5 of 54.8+0.2 vs chain
The other 25 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.8★, per CMS)
3 of 5Advanced Health Care Of CincinnatiCincinnati, OH 3 of 5Aspen Transitional RehabilitationMeridian, ID 4 of 5Advanced Health Care Of SummerlinLas Vegas, NV 4 of 5Ahc Of Landerhaven LLCMayfield Heights, OH 5 of 5Advance Health Care Of ScottsdaleScottsdale, AZ 5 of 5Advanced Health Care Of AuroraAurora, CO 5 of 5Advanced Health Care Of Colorado SpringsColorado Springs, CO 5 of 5Advanced Health Care Of GlendaleGlendale, AZ 5 of 5Advanced Health Care Of HanoverBethlehem, PA 5 of 5Advanced Health Care Of Las VegasLas Vegas, NV 5 of 5Advanced Health Care Of Overland ParkOverland Park, KS 5 of 5Advanced Health Care Of ParadiseLas Vegas, NV 5 of 5Advanced Health Care Of RenoReno, NV 5 of 5Advanced Health Care of AlbuquerqueAlbuquerque, NM 5 of 5Advanced Health Care of Coeur d'AleneCoeur d'Alene, ID 5 of 5Advanced Health Care of SacramentoSacramento, CA 5 of 5Advanced Health Care of SalemSalem, UT 5 of 5Advanced Health Care of St. GeorgeSt. George, UT 5 of 5Advanced Healthcare Of MesaMesa, AZ 5 of 5Ahc Of Lakewood, LLCLakewood, CO 5 of 5Aspen Ridge Transitional RehabMurray, UT 5 of 5Aspen Ridge West Transitional RehabMurray, UT 5 of 5Aspen Ridge of Utah ValleyOrem, UT 5 of 5Pine View Transitional RehabSouth Ogden, UTNot ratedAdvanced Health Care Of NashvilleNashville, TN

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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
NEW AHC HOLDINGS, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST80%since 01/01/2021
THE GAIL MILLER GST TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST70%since 07/01/2023
THE MILLER UTAH TRUST, DATED AUGUST 22, 2019Organization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST5%since 01/01/2023
THE RNC OPPORTUNITY TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST5%since 01/01/2023
GONZALEZ SANCHEZ, MIGUELIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/01/2024
TUCK, MICHAELIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 02/05/2024
OXNAM, NATHANIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2024

4 organizational owners 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.

$10.1M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+15.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.4M
Related-party expense17% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 0%Medicare 65%Other / private 35%

This home reported $1.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 17% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

$659per resident / day
operating cost
$20,042per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$781per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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 NV

Paying with Medicaid

CMS lists this home as Medicare-certified only — it is not Medicaid-certified, so it generally cannot accept Medicaid as payment for a long-term stay. That makes it one of roughly 545 homes nationally where a Medicaid-funded placement is not an option. If you expect to rely on Medicaid, ask the home directly before you tour, and see the Nevada Medicaid page for homes that do.

Typical monthly cost in Nevada
$11,786/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$14,463/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,241/mo
Assisted living

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 295102. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-18, 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.

What to do next