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

Monument Healthcare Pioneer Trail

815 South 200 West, Brigham City, UT 84302 · For profit - Corporation · 72 certified beds · (435) 723-5289 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (435) 723-5289 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Aug 2023Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)2 actual-harm citations$19,747 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Aug 2023
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has 2 actual-harm citations
  • 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
  • the CMS record shows $19,747 in federal fines (most recent 2025-04-03)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • about 66% 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.

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

Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1050 S 500 W · (435) 695-2777 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1017 S 500 W · (435) 723-5211 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
156 S Main St · (435) 734-2500 · Call to confirm hours
Park
560 S Main St · 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 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 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 4 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 rating4★
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 increased7.7%11.3%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.8%3.4%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.7%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.5%1.8%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms8.5%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 injury3.0%2.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened20.8%15.1%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication13.2%25.3%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers6.4%3.9%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control20.3%21.5%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table13.2%14.2%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%0.9%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.7%91.0%79.4%better

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.

61.7% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 29 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

61.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
0.23U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.05hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.15hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.23 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 30% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% 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 SNF61.7%CMS range 48.2–71.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.8%CMS range 5.6–15.210.7%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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identifiednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 staynot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsenednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.981.02Oct 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

1.19
RN hours/ resident / day
0.43
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.05
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.68
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.90
RN hoursweekends
36.2%
Total nursing turnover
25.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 72 beds and averages 36.9 residents a day — about 51% occupied, or roughly 35 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 3.68 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.19 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.05 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 3.21 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.87 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.31 to 0.90 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 36% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

8
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-04-03)
0
at the previous standard inspection (2023-08-24)

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.

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 before2025-04-03 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who were incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections. Specifically, for 1 out of 27 sampled residents, a resident was not given an oral antibiotic that was susceptible to treat her urinary tract infection (UTI) and then required intravenous (IV) antibiotics. Resident identifier: 15. Findings included: Resident 15 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included obstructive and reflex uropathy, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and dementia. On 4/1/25 at 8:23 AM, an interview was attempted with resident 15. Resident 15 was unable to answer any questions. Resident 15's medical record was reviewed. A quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], documented that resident 15 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15. A BIMS score of 13 to 15 indicated intact cognitive function. On 3/6/25 at 3:37 PM, 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Actual harm · G2023-08-24 · 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

    Based on record review, interviews, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from sexual abuse by another resident for 1 (Resident #4) of 6 residents reviewed for abuse prohibition. Resident #189 touched Resident #4, a severely cognitively impaired resident, inappropriately on the breast on 10/23/2022 and the facility failed to implement adequate interventions to address Resident #189's behavior. This failure resulted in Resident #189 touching Resident #4 inappropriately on the legs, private area, and breast area on 12/26/2022. It was determined that the reasonable person in Resident #1's position would have experienced psychosocial harm as a result of sexual abuse. Findings included: The facility policy titled, Freedom from Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, dated November 2017 and last revised 09/13/2022, revealed, The facility will provide a safe resident environment and protect residents from abuse. The facility will keep residents free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation. This…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2025-04-03 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    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 and interview, the facility did not store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, there was expired food in the dairy refrigerator, expired food in the main refrigerator, expired food in the resident refrigerator, unlabeled and undated food in the resident refrigerator, and the facility dish machine was not testing at the required levels. Findings included: On 3/31/25 at 8:05 AM, an initial tour of the kitchen was completed. The following observations were made: a. There was an opened bag of whipped topping with no visible opened date. b There was an open container of parmesan cheese with a use by date of 3/20/25. c. There was an opened container of mozzarella cheese with a use by date of 3/11/25. d. There was a box of lemons with a received date of 1/24/25. e. There was a box of butterscotch cookie drops open to air and discolored with an opened date of 7/23/24. On 3/31/25 at 10:01 AM, an initial inspection of the resident refrigerator was completed. The following observations were…

    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 · Dcited before2025-04-03 · 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, the facility did not ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse were reported immediately, but not later than two hours after the allegation was made, to the State Survey Agency (SSA) and Adult Protective Services (APS). Specifically, for 2 out of 27 sampled residents, notification to the SSA and APS was not done when a resident with cognitive impairments punched another resident in the back. Resident identifiers: 20 and 36. Findings included: 1. Resident 36 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not limited to, Alzheimer's disease, chronic post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and major depressive disorder. Resident 36's medical was reviewed on 4/1/25 through 4/3/25. An admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], documented that resident 36 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 99. A BIMS score of 99 indicated that the interview was not completed. On 2/5/25 at 1:20 AM, a Nursing Note documented Note…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-03 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility in response to allegations of abuse did not have evidence that all alleged violations were thoroughly investigated. Specifically, for 2 out of 27 sampled residents, a resident to resident allegation of abuse was not investigated. Resident identifiers: 20 and 36. Findings included: 1. Resident 36 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not limited to, Alzheimer's disease, chronic post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and major depressive disorder. Resident 36's medical was reviewed on 4/1/25 through 4/3/25. An admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], documented that resident 36 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 99. A BIMS score of 99 indicated that the interview was not completed. On 2/5/25 at 1:20 AM, a Nursing Note documented 'Note Text: Nurse heard banging coming from his room and headed to the room to check it out. room [ROOM NUMBER]A came out of his room and called the nurse. Nurse went…

    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 · D2025-04-03 · tag F0655 — isolated
    Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
    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 develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that included the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality care. Specifically, for 1 out of 27 sampled residents, a resident that was a fall risk on admission did not have a baseline care plan developed within 48 hours of the resident's admission. Resident identifier: 36. Findings included: Resident 36 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not limited to, Alzheimer's disease, chronic post-traumatic stress disorder, and major depressive disorder. Resident 36's medical was reviewed on 4/1/25 through 4/3/25. On 1/13/25 at 5:20 PM, a Morse Fall Scale Evaluation documented that resident 36 was a High Risk for Falling with a score of 50. An admission Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], documented that resident 36 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-03 · 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 did not keep the resident environment as free of accident hazards as was possible; and each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents. Specifically, for 2 out of 27 sampled residents, a resident was observed to have medication left at bedside and a resident that was a high risk for falls did not have interventions in place prior to the resident having a fall. Resident identifiers: 20 and 36. Findings included: 1. Resident 20 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, nonpyogenic thrombosis of intracranial venous system, edema, and chronic pain syndrome. On 4/1/25 at 3:32 PM, an observation and interview were conducted with resident 20. There was an orange tablet inside a medication cup on resident 20's bedside table. Resident 20 stated that the tablet was his buprenorphine medication which he took for pain. Resident 20…

    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 · D2025-04-03 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    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 that residents who used psychotropic drugs received gradual dose reductions (GDR), unless clinically contraindicated, in an effort to discontinue these drugs. Specifically, for 1 out of 27 sampled residents, the provider failed to implement a GDR for a resident who had been receiving an antidepressant medication for depression since April 2024. There was no documentation stating that a GDR would be clinically contraindicated. Resident identifier: 9. Findings included: Resident 9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not limited to, progressive supranuclear ophthalmoplegia, myoneural disorder, type 2 diabetes, hypertensive heart disease with heart failure, and depression. Resident 9's medical record was reviewed on 3/31/25 through 4/3/25. On 4/2/24, a physician's order documented Escitalopram Oxalate Tablet 10 MG [milligrams] Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day related to DEPRESSION. There had been no…

    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 · D2025-04-03 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — isolated
    Implement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
    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 establish an antibiotic stewardship program that included antibiotic use protocols and a system to monitor antibiotic use. Specifically, for 1 out of 27 sampled residents, a resident was given an oral antibiotic that was resistant to treat her urinary tract infection (UTI) and then required intravenous (IV) antibiotics. Resident identifier: 15. Findings included: Resident 15 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included obstructive and reflex uropathy, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and dementia. On 4/1/25 at 8:23 AM, an interview was attempted with resident 15. Resident 15 was unable to answer any questions. Resident 15's medical record was reviewed. A quarterly Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE], documented that resident 15 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15. A BIMS score of 13 to 15 indicated intact cognitive function. On 3/6/25 at 3:37 PM, a nurse practitioner…

    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 · Ecited before2023-08-24 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — pattern
    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

    Based on record reviews, interviews, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to report allegations of abuse within the required two-hour timeframe. This failure affected 4 of 5 total allegations of abuse reviewed by the survey team, involving 5 (Residents #4, #189, #15, #19, and #16) of 6 sampled residents reviewed for abuse concerns. On 10/22/2022 and 12/26/2022, facility staff observed Resident #189 touch Resident #4 inappropriately. The facility did not report either allegation of sexual abuse to the state survey agency. On 03/16/2023, Resident #15 alleged Resident #4 hit them, but the facility did not report the allegation of physical abuse to the state survey agency until 03/19/2023 after a second allegation was made. On 04/27/2023, Resident #19 alleged that Resident #16 inappropriately touched them, and the facility did not report the allegation of sexual abuse to the state survey agency until 04/28/2023. Findings included: A review of a facility policy titled, Freedom from Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, dated 11/2017, revealed, 3. When the facility has…

    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 · D2023-08-24 · tag F0573 — isolated
    Let each resident or the resident's legal representative access or purchase copies of all the resident's records.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record review, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to obtain copies of the resident's medical record upon request for 1 (Resident #37) of 1 sampled discharged resident. Findings included: A review of a facility policy titled, Resident Records- Identifiable Information, revised 05/04/2023, indicated, 5. Medical records will be kept confidential, except when release is: a. To the individual or their representative where permitted by applicable law. A review of Resident #37's admission Record indicated the facility admitted the resident on 05/20/2023 with diagnoses including the presence of a left artificial knee joint, major depression, and anxiety disorder. The record indicated the resident was discharged from the facility on 06/06/2023 to a private home with home health services. The 5-day Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 05/25/2023, revealed Resident #37 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS)…

    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 · D2023-08-24 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
    Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy and document review, the facility failed to follow and implement their abuse policies by failing to protect a resident from further potential abuse for 1 (Resident #4) of 7 residents reviewed for abuse prohibition. Specifically, Resident #4 was sexually abused by Resident #189 on 10/23/2022. Resident #189 continued having sexually inappropriate behaviors and then Resident #4 was sexually abused by Resident #189 again on 12/26/2022. During the incident on 12/26/2022, a staff member left the residents alone to get help while Resident #189 was still abusing Resident #4. Findings included: A review of a facility policy titled, Freedom from Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, dated November 2017 and last revised 09/13/2022, revealed, The facility will provide a safe resident environment and protect residents from abuse. The facility will keep residents free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation. This includes freedom from verbal, mental, sexual, or physical abuse, corporal punishment, involuntary…

    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 · D2023-08-24 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews, record review, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to develop and implement a care plan with appropriate interventions to prevent resident-to-resident sexual abuse. Specifically, Resident #189 began having increased sexual behaviors toward staff and residents on approximately 10/11/2022. On 10/23/2022, Resident #189 touched Resident #4 inappropriately on the breast and on 12/26/2022 a second incident occurred where Resident #189 and Resident #4 were left unsupervised and Resident #189 touched Resident #4 on the legs, private area, and breast area. The facility did not implement Resident #189's care plan that directed staff to redirect the resident away from female residents. Findings included: The facility policy titled, Freedom from Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation dated November 2017 and last revised 09/13/2022, revealed, The facility will provide a safe resident environment and protect residents from abuse. The facility will keep residents free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property and exploitation. This includes…

    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 · D2021-10-14 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    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, the facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, allowing the resident to use his or her personal belongings to the extent possible. Specifically, one resident was missing a personal item that was not located and not replaced. Resident identifier: 33. Findings include: Resident 33 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dysthymic disorder, dysphagia, post-traumatic stress disorder, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, a history of transient ischemic attacks, heart failure, anxiety, and diabetes. On 10/13/21 at 9:47 AM, resident 33 was interviewed. Resident 33 stated that he was missing a beautiful southwest blanket for over a month. Resident 33 stated that staff had looked for it, but could not find it. Resident 33 stated that he did not know the status of looking for his blanket and no resolution occurred. On 10/14/21, resident 33's medical record review was completed. Resident 33 had an…

    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 · Dcited before2021-10-14 · 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 interview and record review it was determined, for 1 of 28 sample residents, that the facility did not ensure that a resident who was incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections. Specifically, a resident did not receive catheter care treatment after developing signs of a urinary tract infection (UTI) and after a positive urine culture. Resident identifier: 7. Findings include: Resident 7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), sepsis, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), respiratory failure, and hypertension. Resident 7 was admitted to hospice services on 4/23/21. On 10/12/21 at 1:18 PM, resident 7 stated that he had problems with his catheter. Resident 7 stated that when staff worked with it, he experienced pain in his penis. On 10/14/21, resident 7's electronic medical record review was completed. Resident 7's physician orders included an order for a Foley catheter…

    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 · D2021-10-14 · tag F0886 — failed to test for COVID-19 as required — isolated
    Perform COVID19 testing on residents and staff.
    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 sample staff, that the facility did not conducted testing based on parameters. Specifically, a staff member was not tested twice weekly according to the community transmission rate. Staff identifiers: Staff 1. Findings include: According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) the community transmission was red on 9/20/21, 9/27/21, 10/4/21 and 10/12/21. https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#county-view|Utah|49035|Risk|community_transmission_level According to the Interim Final Rule (IFC), CMS-3401-IFC, Additional Policy and Regulatory Revisions in Response to the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency related to Long-Term Care (LTC) Facility Testing Requirements revised on 9/10/21, routine staff testing for High (red) community transmission unvaccinated staff was required twice weekly. Staff testing was completed on 9/13/21, 9/16/21, 9/20/21, 9/23/21, 9/27/21, 9/30, 10/4/21, 10/7/21 and 10/11/21. Staff 1's testing was reviewed 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.

    Infection Control 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

$19,747 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

  • $7,579 — penalty dated 2025-04-03
  • $12,168 — penalty dated 2023-08-24

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 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 3 of 52.2+0.8 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 52.8+1.2 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.7+0.3 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 07/01/2018
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
ANDERSON, RICHARDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
CLAWSON, TRAVISIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
ESPINOSA, STEPHANIEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/01/2025
FRAGOSO, LINDSAYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
HARDY, AMANDAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/01/2025
MARRIOTT, STEPHENIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
NIXON, TYLERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
ROBERTSON, BRETTIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
SAMUELIAN, SPENCERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
SEASTRAND, JASONIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/01/2025
WEST, CHRISTIANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
MONUMENT HEALTH PROPERTIES LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025
MONUMENT REAL ESTATE PIONEER TRAIL LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 02/07/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 31 rows in the source record cover these 16 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.

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.

$4.6M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-5.0%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$3.2M
Related-party expense66% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 60%Medicare 6%Other / private 34%

This home reported $3.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 66% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

$373per resident / day
operating cost
$11,325per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$355per 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 465020. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-03, 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