Stonehenge of Cedar City

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

68.4% 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 173 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 40.6% 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 69 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 0.43 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 73% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 50 beds and averages 43.2 residents a day — about 86% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 3.76 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.04 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.15 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 3.25 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.97 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.29 to 0.40 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 59% is well above the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are 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.

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.

19 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 6 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · Gcited before2026-05-19 · 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, observation and record review, the facility did not ensure that 1 of 2 sample residents were free of accident hazards as is possible; received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents. Specifically, one resident was burned after heat source was placed on his abdomen. This will be cited at a harm level but at past non-compliance. Resident identifier: 1. It was determined the provider's non-compliance with the requirements of participation had caused harm. The harm was related to the State Operations Manual, Appendix PP, [S483.25(d) Accidents. The facility must ensure that - S483.25(d)(1) The resident environment remains as free of accident hazards as is possible; and S483.25(d)(2) Each resident receives adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents, F689, at a scope and severity of G.] However, based on the facility's corrective actions and a review of its current compliance in this regulatory area, the deficiency was determined to be past…

  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 · Past Non-Compliance
• Actual harm · G2026-03-26 · 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 record review, for 3 of 30 sampled residents, the facility did not treat each resident with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality. Specifically, residents reported they had incontinent episodes waiting for staff to answer their call lights. Resident 55 was cited at a harm level because she stopped drinking because staff were too busy to help her to the bathroom. Resident identifiers: 34, 54 and 55. Findings Included: 1. Resident 55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included periprosthetic fracture hip fracture, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction, artificial hip joint, major depressive disorder and anxiety. On 3/23/26 at 2:14 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 55. Resident 55 stated there were not enough staff, especially from 6:00 PM until 6:00 AM because there 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · G2026-03-26 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — isolated
  Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
  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, for the 10 of 30 sampled residents, facility did not have sufficient nursing staff with appropriate competencies and skills sets to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psycho-social well-being of each resident. Specifically, for 10 out of 30 sampled residents, multiple residents voiced concerns with call light wait times and not receiving assistance with the bathroom which led to incontinent episodes. In addition, concerns with regards to staffing issues and long call light times were raised as grievances and during resident council meetings on repeated occasions. This will be cited at harm level. Resident identifiers: 3, 6, 8, 10, 16, 21, 34, 54, 55 and 56. Findings included: Resident Interviews 1. Resident 55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included periprosthetic fracture hip fracture, hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral…

  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.

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-03-26 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to make prompt efforts to resolve grievances that residents might have. Specifically, grievances regarding staffing issues were not resolved. Findings included: A review of the grievances revealed the following: 1. On 10/15/25, Left waiting on my bed for the CNAs [Certified Nursing Assistant] to take me to breakfast which happens all the time. I am sick of not being on time for my breakfast or all of my meals, for that matter. This is ridiculous!!! You need more staff. Steps taken to investigate the grievance was Resident Advocate checked call light response time. Call light was on at 8:15 AM, resident did not get to breakfast until 9:30 AM. The summary of findings/conclusion was Call light response time left resident waiting for over one hour. Resident advocate informed DON [Director of Nursing]. DON educated staff on call light response time goal of 5-6 minutes not one hour. DON will continue to monitor & [and] improve response times with nursing staff. 2. On 11/10/25, Resident reports dissatisfaction with call light…

  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 · E2026-03-26 · tag F0628 — pattern
  Provide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, for 4 of 30 sampled residents, the facility failed to ensure that a complete copy of the discharge/transfer documentation was maintained in the clinical record and a resident did not have a discharge summary. Specifically, the facility failed to document the discharge location, document what paperwork was sent with a resident to the hospital, a reconciliation of all pre-discharge medications with the resident's post-discharge medications (both prescribed and over-the-counter) and complete a discharge summary. Resident identifiers: 1, 2, 50 and 52. Findings included: 1. Resident 1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged [DATE] with diagnoses which included pneumonitis due to inhalation of food and vomit, dysphagia, and chronic kidney disease, stage 3. Review of resident 1's medical record was completed on 3/23/26 through 3/26/26. On 3/21/26 at 12:27 pm, a Discharge Nursing Note revealed, Patient was admitted to [name redacted] on 01/27/2026 for aspiration PNA…

  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 · E2026-03-26 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
  Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
  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, for 5 of 30 sampled residents, the facility did not provide each resident with food and drink that was palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature. Specifically, there were individual resident complaints resident council minutes and grievances regarding the food palatability. In addition, the test tray was not palatable, attractive or served at an appetizing temperature. Resident identifiers: 8, 21, 24, 46 and 54.Findings included:1. On 3/23/26 at 1:53 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 54. Resident 54 stated the food was so/so and it was bland. Resident 54 stated if she did not like what was served, staff did not offer her something different. Resident 54 stated she did not like dark meat but felt like she only got dark meat. 2. On 3/23/26 at 2:08 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 21's family member. The family member stated resident 21 did not have a good appetite and he either eats it or doesn't. The family member…

  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 · D2026-03-26 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolated
  Ensure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
  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, it was determined, for 1 out of 30 sampled residents, that the facility failed to ensure each resident was given the appropriate treatment and services to maintain or improve his or her ability to carry out the activities of daily living (ADLs), consistent with the resident's comprehensive assessment and plan of care. This failure included the facility not ensuring that each resident was given the appropriate treatment and services to maintain or improve his or her ability to carry out the activities of daily living for dining-eating, including meals and snacks. Specifically, one resident was not provided with bite-sized cut food or opened food containers when they were assessed as requiring this assistance. Resident identifier: 10. Findings included: On 3/23/26 at 1:10 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 10 in her room and she stated that she was unable to cut up her own food because her right arm was broken and only had use of her left hand. 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
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-26 · 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 assistive devices to prevent accidents. Specifically, for 1 out of 30 sampled residents, a high fall-risk resident did not have interventions put in place after falls, and interventions were repeated. Resident identifier: 7. Findings included: Resident 7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included unspecified dementia, muscle weakness, and other abnormalities of gait and mobility. Resident 7's medical record was reviewed 3/23/26 through 3/26/26. A review of resident 7's care plan revealed that resident 7 was at risk for falls related to confusion, abnormal gait, and opioid use. A review of resident 7's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed that resident 7 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3. A score of 0-7 indicated severe…

  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 · D2026-03-26 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
  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 30 sampled residents, the facility failed to ensure each resident received food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs. Specifically, two residents received snacks that were not pureed or minced and moist. Resident identifiers: 25 and 37. Findings included: 1. Resident 25 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dementia and Alzheimer's disease. Resident 25's medical record was reviewed 3/23/26 though 3/26/26. A physician's order dated 12/12/25 indicated resident 25 was on a pureed textured diet. A Nursing progress note dated 1/26/26 at 4:59 AM indicated, .gave ham sandwiches and potato chips with chocolate ensure during the night. A Nursing progress note dated 2/1/26 at 3:01 AM indicated, resident is awake and alert gave ham sandwich and potato chips. A Nursing progress note dated 2/7/26 at 11:47 PM indicated, 2300 [11:00 PM] Resident has been awake in living room no sandwiches were available I gave her potato chips.…

  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 before2025-02-05 · 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

  Based on staff interview, review of medical records, and review of the policy and procedures, facility staff did not report to the State Agency bruising of unknown origin for 1 resident in the sample of 5. (Resident identifier: 1.) Findings include: A nursing note, dated January 27, 2025, for resident 1, noted that staff found bruising to the neck, back and sides. On 2/5/2025, the licensor interviewed Admin 1. Admin 1 stated the bruising to resident 1 ' s back and sides were present at the time of admission to the facility. Admin 1 stated that resident 1 was assessed and that the bruising to the anterior neck was caused by a shirt that resident 1 was wearing. Admin 1 stated that resident 1 was admitted to the hospital with a new diagnosis of hemophilia, which contributed to the bruising. Admin 1 stated because of the shirt and new diagnosis, resident 1 did not have an injury of unknown origin and that a critical incident was not reported to the State Agency within one business day as required. The licensor reviewed the facility ' s Abuse Reporting Policy which indicated that the…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-11-30 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide fingernail care for 1 (Resident #15) of 2 residents sampled for activities of daily living (ADLs). Findings included: A review of a facility policy titled Fingernails/Toenails, Care of, dated February 2018, revealed The purposes of this procedure are to clean the nail bed, to keep nails trimmed, and to prevent infections. The policy revealed, General Guidelines. 1. Nail care includes daily cleaning and regular trimming. 2. Proper nail care can aid in the prevention of skin problems around the nail bed and 4. Trimmed and smooth nails prevent the resident from accidentally scratching and injuring his or her skin. The policy further revealed, The following information should be recorded in the resident's medical record: 1. The date and time that nail care was given. 2. The name and title of the individual(s) who administered the nail care. 3. The condition of the resident's nails and nail bed. The policy revealed documentation should also include 4. Any difficulties in cutting the…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2021-12-01 · tag F0882 — widespread
  Designate a qualified infection preventionist to be responsible for the infection prevent and control program in the nursing home.
  What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

  Based upon interview and record review it was determined that the facility did not ensure that the Infection Preventionist (IP) had completed specialized training in infection prevention and control. Specifically, the designated IP had not completed the designated training. Findings include: On 12/01/21 at 8:20 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated that she was the Infection Preventionist (IP) for the facility. The DON stated she had not completed the specialized training from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as she was new to her position as DON. The DON stated that the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) and Minimum Data Set (MDS) nurse were also new to their positions and had not completed the specialized training either.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2021-12-01 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolated
  Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
  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 the review it was determined, for 2 of 15 sample residents, the facility did not ensure that patient privacy was protected. Specifically, another resident's name was used in another residents medical record. Resident identifier: 4 and 35. Findings include: Resident 4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included hypertension, reflux, Parkinson's disease and muscle weakness. Resident 4's record was reviewed on 11/28/21. A nurses note dated 11/28/21 stated LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse) [1] and RN (Registered Nurse) [1] came from different hallways and noted [Resident 4's name] and other resident [Resident 35's name] on the floor laying next to each other in the living room by the nurses station. On 11/30/21 at 10:34 AM, an interview was conducted with RN 3. RN 3 stated that when charting resident names were not used to protect the privacy of all residents. On 12/01/21 at 10:53 AM, an interview with the Director of Nursing (DON) was conducted. The DON stated…

  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

“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.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to STONEHENGE OF UTAH — 5 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 18 rows in the source record cover these 9 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.

This home reported $202K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in UT