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

Monument Healthcare Stonecreek

523 North Main Street, Bountiful, UT 84010 · Government - Hospital district · 122 certified beds · (801) 951-2273 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (801) 951-2273 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Feb 2020Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0740)1 actual-harm citation1 actual-harm citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Feb 2020
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • about 56% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
  • its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions

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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
390 N Main St · (801) 294-1066 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
230 S Main St · (801) 295-3439 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
(801) 797-9522 · Call to confirm hours
Park
400 N 200 W · (801) 298-6095 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 2 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 improved from 4 to 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
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased13.9%11.3%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.7%3.4%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.9%0.7%0.9%typical
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.4%1.8%2.0%worse
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms4.6%16.5%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.5%2.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened14.0%15.1%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication19.8%25.3%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.8%3.9%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control15.2%21.5%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table8.5%14.2%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.2%0.9%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine89.1%91.0%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission32.1%16.5%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit12.4%11.6%12.0%typical

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.

58.8% 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 128 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

58.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
37.2%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.29U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.16hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.12hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 37.2% 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 51 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 0.29 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 45% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 15% 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 SNF58.8%CMS range 50.9–66.151.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.8%CMS range 7.2–14.910.7%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 discharge37.2%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 discharge29.4%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 identified95.7%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 setting100.0%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 stay0.0%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 worsened2.9%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 hospitalization7.3%CMS range 3.9–11.67.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.121.02Oct 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

1.39
RN hours/ resident / day
0.30
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.84
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.54
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
1.04
RN hoursweekends
53.8%
Total nursing turnover
43.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 122 beds and averages 77.1 residents a day — about 63% occupied, or roughly 45 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 3.54 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.39 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.84 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 3.11 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.71 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.53 to 1.04 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 54% 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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-04-29)
0
at the previous standard inspection (2022-07-11)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

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.

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

  • Actual harm · Gcited before2024-01-03 · 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 interview and record review, it was determined for 1 of 5 sampled residents, that the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive assessment, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's preferences. Specifically, a resident with multiple co-morbidities who had a change in condition, was hospitalized after failure to identify the change in condition in a timely manner. The deficient practice for resident 1 was found to have occurred at a harm level. Resident identifier: 1. Findings include: Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included non-traumatic subdural hemorrhage, encephalopathy, epilepsy, end stage renal disease, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarct, history of falling, attention and concentration deficit following non-traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage, Alzheimer's disease, dementia, and schizophrenia. Resident…

    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
  • Actual harm · G2020-02-20 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect 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 interview and observation, it was determined the facility did not ensure that each resident had the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation. Specifically, for 2 of 31 sampled residents, a resident to resident altercation occurred in which both residents sustained physical injuries. Additionally, one of the residents experienced increased anxiety from her baseline following the altercation. Resident identifiers: 52 and 169. Based on corrective measures taken by the facility, the non-compliance was determined to be past non-compliance. Corrective measures were implemented by 1/8/20. Corrective measures included: Treatment and evaluation of the residents involved in the altercation, identification and review of other residents at risk within the secured unit, documented staff education, audits of behavior monitoring performed by the Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement meeting members, and continued monthly dementia dialogue meetings to assess…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-25 · 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 interview and record review, for 2 out of 40 sampled residents, the facility did not ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents. Specifically, a resident left the facility and called his daughter to report he was lost and a week later another resident, who needed to be supervised during a Leave of Absence, left the facility. Resident identifiers: 29 and 110.Findings included:1. Resident 110 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 3/27/26 and readmitted on [DATE] and discharged on 6/2/26 with diagnoses which included depression, alcohol dependence, and history of transient ischemic attack. The facility reported to the State Survey Agency (SSA) on 5/22/26 at 11:32 AM, that resident 110 took an uber to get a haircut and called his daughter because he did not know how to get back on 5/14/26 at 11:35 AM. The daughter called the facility and they went and picked him up. It should be noted the incident happened on 5/21/26, not 5/14/26 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-05 · 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 interview and record review, it was determined for 1 out of 8 sampled residents, the facility did not ensure that all residents received the treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's choice. Specifically, a resident was not provided wound vac supplies in a timely manner. Resident identifier: 2.Findings included: Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, encounter for orthopedic aftercare, acquired absence of left great toe, and type 2 diabetes.A review of resident 2's medical record revealed the following:a. On 6/5/25 at 7:02 PM, a progress note documented, Resident back from wound clinic appointment from [local hospital]. Notes state to order wound vac, and send it with patient to next appointment and doctor wants patient to do hyperbaric oxygen therapy, team at [facility] needs to talk about a decision. Resident aware of orders. DON [Director of Nursing] [name…

    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 · D2026-01-05 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review it was determined, for 2 out of 8 sampled residents, the facility did not provide routine and emergency drugs and biologicals to its residents. Specifically, residents were not provided multiple medications due to them being out of stock and unavailable from the pharmacy. Resident identifiers: 2 and 8.Findings included: 1. Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, encounter for orthopedic aftercare, acquired absence of left great toe, and type 2 diabetes.Resident 2's medical record was reviewed on 1/5/26.A review of resident 2's medication orders revealed:a. Glimepiride Oral Tablet 4 MG [milligram] Give 4 mg by mouth at bedtime for T2DM [Type 2 diabetes mellitus]. The start date of this medication was 5/15/25.b. Eucerin Advanced Repair External Cream (Emollient) Apply to [NAME] [bilateral] Lower extremites [sic] topically two times a day for Dry scaley [sic] skin. The start date of this medication was 5/26/25. c. Amitriptyline HCI…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-05 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
    Ensure 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 interview and record review, the facility did not ensure residents were free of any significant medication errors. Specifically, 1 out of 8 sampled residents did not receive their intravenous (IV) antibiotics every 8 hours as ordered by the hospital. Resident identifier: 2. Findings included: Resident 2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, encounter for orthopedic aftercare, acquired absence of left great toe, and type 2 diabetes.Resident 2's medical record was reviewed on 1/5/26.A review of resident 2's hospital discharge orders dated 5/15/25 at 1:08 PM, documented Cefazolin 2 GM [gram] (TRADE NAME: ANCEF 2 GM/100 ML [milliliters] IVPB) [intravenous piggyback] INTRAVENOUS EVERY 8 HOURS 50 days. The last dose was documented as being received on 5/15/25 at 7:24 AM at the hospital.A review of resident 2's medication orders revealed: a. On 5/15/25 an order for CeFAZolin Sodium Solution Reconstituted 1 GM Use 2 gram intravenously every 24 hours for infection for 50 Days.b.…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-04-29 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure 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

    Based on observation and interview, the facility did not label all drugs and biological's used in the facility in accordance with currently accepted professional principles, and include appropriate accessory instructions and the expiration date when applicable. Specifically, an insulin pen and a vial of Lidocaine were not labeled with an open date and were open and available for use. In addition, narcotics were repackaged into the narcotic cards. Findings included: 1. On 4/24/24 at 8:25 AM, an observation was made of the 100 hallway medication cart with Registered Nurse (RN) 1. A pre-filled pen of Lantus 100 units/milliliter was open and available for use. No open date could be seen on the pen. On 4/24/24 at 8:30 AM, an interview was conducted with RN 1. RN 1 stated the medications that were in the cart were currently being used for the residents. RN 1 stated when an insulin pen was taken out of the medication room the nurses were supposed to label it with an open date. RN 1 stated insulin was good for 30 days after it was opened but could not say how long this insulin pen was good…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-29 · 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, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as was possible and each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents. Specifically, for 1 out of 26 sampled residents, a resident that was dependent on staff and required maximum assistance for bed mobility and toilet use had a brief change performed by one Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), rolled out of the bed, and received contusions and suffered emotional distress. Resident identifier: 41. Findings included: Resident 41 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included fibromyalgia, esophageal varices without bleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, urinary tract infection, alcoholic cirrhoses of the liver with ascites, gastroesophageal reflux disease with esophagititis, essential hypertension, vitamin deficiency, mixed hyperlipidemia, hypothyroidism, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, ileus, anemia, and muscle…

    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 · D2024-04-29 · 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 observation, interview, and record the review, the facility did not ensure that pain management was provided to residents who required such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences. Specifically, for 1 out of 26 sampled residents, a resident that was observed and verbally expressed their pain was not provided pain medication in a timely manner. Resident identifier: 41. Findings included: Resident 41 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included fibromyalgia, esophageal varices without bleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, urinary tract infection, alcoholic cirrhoses of the liver with ascites, gastroesophageal reflux disease with esophagititis, essential hypertension, vitamin deficiency, mixed hyperlipidemia, hypothyroidism, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, ileus, anemia, and muscle weakness. Resident 41's medical record was reviewed on 4/24/24. On 4/24/24 at 8:15 AM, during morning…

    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 · D2024-04-29 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolated
    Ensure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that each resident received the necessary behavioral health care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being, in accordance with the comprehensive assessment and plan of care. Specifically, for 1 out of 26 sampled residents, behavioral health services were not provided to a resident who was assessed to need them. Resident identifier: 29. Findings included: Resident 29 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation, type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy, morbid obesity, osteomyelitis, infection of amputation stump of right lower extremity, methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus infection, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, atrial septal defect as current complication following acute myocardial infarction, major depressive disorder, insomnia, congestive heart failure,…

    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 · D2024-01-03 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    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 and record review, it was determined that for 1 of 5 sampled residents that the facility did not notify the facility's physician or resident representative of a significant change in a resident's physical, mental, or psychosocial status. Specifically, the facility did not inform a resident's physician of the resident's change in mental status prior to sending her out for a hemodialysis appointment. Upon arrival to the appointment, the hemodialysis center then sent the resident out to the hospital due to her altered mental status. Resident Identifier: 1 Findings include: Resident 1 was originally admitted [DATE], readmitted [DATE], with diagnoses including, but not limited to: nontraumatic subdural hemorrhage unspecified, other encephalopathy, epilepsy unspecified not intractable without status epilepticus, end stage renal disease, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infraction affecting left non-dominant side, hypotension unspecified, Alzheimer's disease unspecified, 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2020-02-20 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    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 and medical record review it was determined, for 1 of 31 sampled residents, that the facility did not treat each resident with respect and dignity and cared for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life. Specifically, one resident with intact cognition and no episodes of elopement had a wander guard placed on her ankle which limited her mobility and independence. Resident identifier: 11. Findings included: Resident 11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Parkinson's disease, epilepsy, seizures, pseudobulbar effect, history (hx) of traumatic brain injury, encephalopathy, Alzheimer's disease, hx of falls, muscle weakness, mild cognitive impairment, dementia, and exophoria. On 2/18/20 at 11:15 AM, resident 11 was interviewed. Resident 11 was observed to have a wander guard on her left ankle. Resident 11 stated that she enjoyed going out of the building…

    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 · D2020-02-20 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely 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 interview and record review it was determined, for 2 of 31 sampled residents, that the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment were reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury, to the administrator of the facility and to other officials in accordance with State law through established procedures. Specifically, a resident to resident altercation occurred in which a resident threw a garbage can at another resident and the altercation was not reported to the State Survey Agency. Resident identifiers: 52 and 169. Findings include: 1. Resident 52 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dementia, major depressive disorder, chronic kidney disease, hypertension,…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2020-02-20 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    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 and record review it was determined, for 2 of 31 sampled residents, that the facility assessment did not accurately reflect the resident's status. Specifically, a resident who was receiving Hospice services and had significant weight loss was not coded accurately on the significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment. In addition, a resident with a wanderguard elopement alarm was not coded accurately on the MDS assessments as having the alarm. Resident identifiers: 11 and 28. Findings include: 1. Resident 28 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Parkinson's disease, dementia without behavioral disturbance, mild intellectual disabilities, edema, repeated falls, and pain. The MDS Resident Matrix provided by the facility upon entrance was reviewed. Resident 28 was checked for receiving Hospice services and as having an excessive weight loss without a prescribed weight loss program. Resident 28's medical record was reviewed on 2/29/20. A…

    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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2020-02-20 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    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 observation, interview, and record review, it was determined the facility did not establish and maintain an infection control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Specifically, observations were made of a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) simultaneously assisting two residents with eating without utilizing adequate hand hygiene practices. Findings include: On 2/18/20, the following observations were made throughout lunch meal service within the secured unit: a. At 11:33 AM, two residents were observed sitting at the same table and feeding themselves utilizing their own silverware. b. At 11:45 AM, CNA 3 was observed to provide a bite of food to one of the two residents utilizing the resident's silverware. c. At 11:49 AM, CNA 3 provided a bite of food to the second resident utilizing the resident's silverware. CNA 3 was subsequently observed to smooth the resident's hair. d. At 11:52 AM, CNA 3 provided a bite of food to the first resident utilizing…

    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 date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2020-02-20 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolated
    Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, it was determined the facility did not provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, staff, and the public. Specifically, observations were made of unclean chairs within the dining room located on the secured unit. Findings include: On 2/18/20 at 11:30 AM, observations were made throughout lunch meal service within the dining room located on the secured unit. A Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was observed to take a roll of plastic bags out of her pocket, tear off one plastic bag, and cover the seat of a dining room chair prior to sitting down. Furthermore, a second CNA was observed sitting on a chair that was also covered with a plastic bag. On 2/18/20 at 2:17 PM, additional observations were made within the dining room located on the secured unit. Three recliners were observed side by side, two of which were constructed with leather-like material and the third constructed with fabric. A CNA was observed assisting a resident out of the fabric recliner, and the resident's pants were observed to be wet. The CNA…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to MONUMENT HEALTH GROUP — 11 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 4 of 52.8+1.2 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.2+1.8 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.7-0.7 vs chain
The other 10 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.8★, 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
MURRAY, BRIANIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2020
GUNNISON VALLEY HOSPITALOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/28/2025
HEALTH GROUP MANAGEMENT LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
MONUMENT HEALTH GROUP LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
CLAWSON, TRAVISIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
FRAGOSO, LINDSAYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
GALINDO, MICHAELIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
MARRIOTT, STEPHENIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
MERKLEY, DAVIDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/16/2026
ROBERTSON, BRETTIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
SAMUELIAN, SPENCERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
SANTIBANEZ, JORGEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
SEASTRAND, JASONIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
WEST, CHRISTIANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
WEST, SHAYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
MONUMENT HEALTH PROPERTIES LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
MONUMENT REAL ESTATE NORTH BOUNTIFUL LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 33 rows in the source record cover these 17 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.

5 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.

$8.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+1.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$4.7M
Related-party expense56% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 54%Medicare 16%Other / private 30%

This home reported $4.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 56% 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 2024. 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

$408per resident / day
operating cost
$12,398per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$415per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). 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 UT

Paying with Medicaid

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 Utah Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Utah
$8,669/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$10,646/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,475/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 465156. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-04-29, 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