Coral Desert Rehabilitation and Care
1490 East Foremaster Drive, St. George, UT 84790 · For profit - Corporation · 60 certified beds · (435) 674-5195 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.6% | 3.4% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 1.8% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.0% | 2.5% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 5.6% | 25.3% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 19.9% | 3.9% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.0% | 14.2% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 0.9% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 91.8% | 91.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 20.6% | 16.5% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 15.2% | 11.6% | 12.0% | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ 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.
72.1% 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 456 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 73.5% 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 170 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 1.04 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 97% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 19% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 72.1%CMS range 67.2–76.5 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 8.8%CMS range 7.0–10.6 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 73.5% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 55.3% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 72.3% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 97.7% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 98.2% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.4% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.7% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.7%CMS range 4.4–10.0 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.89 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 52.3 residents a day — about 87% occupied, or roughly 8 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.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 4.22 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.91 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.57 to 0.65 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 47% is about the same as 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · D2024-11-21 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure that the interdisciplinary team had determined that the resident's right to self administer medications was clinically appropriate. Specifically, for 1 out of 37 sampled residents, a resident had a medication stored on the bed side table and the resident had not been evaluated to determine if they were safe to self administer medications. Resident identifier: 108. Findings included: Resident 108 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not limited to, spinal stenosis lumbar region, type two diabetes mellitus, cognitive communication deficit, anxiety disorder, mood affective disorder, scoliosis, and fall on same level. On 11/19/24 at 8:56 AM, an observation was conducted of resident 108's room. A bottle of AREDS 2 eye vitamin and mineral supplement was observed on resident 108's bedside table. Resident 108's medical record was reviewed on 11/19/24 through 11/21/24. An admission Minimum Data Set…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-21 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that each resident's drug regimen was free from unnecessary drugs and was provided adequate monitoring of those drugs. Specifically, for 1 out of 37 sampled residents, a resident taking a medication used as a hypnotic was not monitored for the number of hours of sleep each night. Resident Identifier: 46. Findings included: Resident 46 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included, but were not limited to, displaced midcervical fracture of right femur, depression, and chronic kidney disease. Resident 46's medical record was reviewed on 11/18/24 through 11/21/24. A physician's order dated 11/2/24, documented Hydroxyzine HCL [hydrochloride] Oral Tablet 25 MG [milligrams] Give 1 tablet by mouth at bedtime for Sleep. There were no physician's orders located for staff to monitor for the amount of sleep resident 46 obtained each night. The Medication Administration Record (MAR) and Treatment Administration Record were reviewed for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-12-15 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility did not ensure that medication error rates were not 5 percent or greater. Observations of 30 medication opportunities, on 12/14/22, revealed 2 medication errors which resulted in a 6.67% medication error rate. Specifically, for 1 out of 19 sampled residents, a resident received two expired medications. Resident identifier: 148. Findings included: Resident 148 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease. On 12/14/22 at 7:34 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1 was observed to administer PreserVision AREDS 2 tablets with an expiration date of 3/31/22 and Centrum Adult Multivitamin 1 tablet with an expiration date of 4/30/22 to resident 148. On 12/14/22 at 7:40 AM, an interview was conducted with LPN 1. LPN 1 stated the medications came from the resident's hospice company. LPN 1 stated it was the responsibility of the admitting nurse to verify that the medications were not expired and each nurse should check the expiration…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-12-15 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility did not ensure that drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with accepted professional principles, included the accessory and cautionary instructions and the expiration date when applicable, and were stored in locked compartments. Specifically, observations were made of medications left unattended on top of the medication cart, the medication cart was left unlocked when unattended, and expired medications were administered. Resident identifiers: 9, 17, 100, and 148. Findings included: 1. On 12/14/22 at 7:09 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1 was observed to enter resident 9's room and leave the medication cart for the 100 hallway unlocked with medications unattended on top of the medication cart. 2. On 12/14/22 at 7:34 AM, LPN 1 was observed to administer PreserVision AREDS 2 tablets with an expiration date of 3/31/22, and Centrum Adult Multivitamin 1 tablet with an expiration date of 4/30/22, to resident 148. LPN 1 was immediately interviewed and stated the medications came from the resident's hospice…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-12-15 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility did not store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards of food service safety. Specifically, food items in the dry storage room, refrigerator, and freezer were open to air and food items in the refrigerator were past the use by date. Findings included: On 12/12/22 at 1:40 PM, an initial walk-through of the kitchen was conducted. In the walk-in refrigerator a container of cottage cheese was observed with a use by date of 12/7/22. The date written on the top of the container was 12/10/22. Additionally, in the walk-in freezer, a box of uncooked bacon strips was open to air. In the walk-in freezer, a box of pizza dough with a use by date of 12/7/22 was observed. A box with frozen tortillas and a box of sausage links were also observed to be open to air. In the dry food storage room, a package of spaghetti noodles was observed to be unsealed and open to air. On 12/15/22 at approximately 11:00 AM, a second walk-through of the kitchen was conducted. In the walk-in refrigerator, a container of cottage…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-12-15 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, it was determined that the facility did not maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Specifically, staff did not use hand hygiene (HH) during medication pass, a medication was touched with an ungloved hand and placed back in the medication pack for future use, and medication was touched after no HH was used and administered to a resident. Resident identifier: 9 Findings included: 1. On 12/14/22, an observation was made of Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) 1. LPN 1 did not use HH prior to beginning medication pass. LPN 1 deposited 2 pills into the medication cup which held previously dispensed medications for resident 9. LPN 1 took her ungloved right hand and placed it into the medication cup to retrieve one of the medications. The medication was then placed back into the medication pack and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-15 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident consistent with the resident's rights that includes measurable objectives and timeframe's to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment. Specifically, for 3 out of 19 sampled residents, a resident who required one on one feeding assistance was not receiving that assistance, and two residents who required oxygen did not have the use of oxygen included in the comprehensive care plan. Resident identifiers: 91, 103, and 143. Findings included: 1. Resident 91 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included displaced intertrochanteric fracture of left femur, other intraarticular fracture of lower end of left radius, history of falling, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dehydration, nutritional anemia, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. On 12/13/22 at 11:49 AM, 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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-15 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not provide a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene. Specifically, for 1 out of 19 sampled residents, a resident was not provided one on one feeding assistance. Resident identifier: 143. Findings included: Resident 143 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included traumatic subdural hemorrhage with loss of consciousness, hemiplegia and hemipareses affecting right dominant side, displaced supracondylar fracture of right humerus, and history of falling. On 12/12/22 at 3:30 PM, an interview was conducted with resident 143's family member. The family member stated the staff did not cut up resident 143's food. The family member stated resident 143 could only use her left arm, which was her non-dominant arm, since her stroke and broken right arm. The family member stated if he was not at the facility to help resident 143, she would…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-15 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure that residents maintained acceptable parameters of nutritional status. Specifically, for 1 out of 19 sampled residents, a resident with weight loss did not receive timely and appropriate interventions. Resident identifier: 18. Findings included: Resident 18 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dependence on ventilator, unspecified intracranial injury, epilepsy, type II diabetes hemiplegia and hemipareses on left non-dominant side, dysphagia, and anxiety. On 12/15/22, resident 18's medical record was reviewed. On 9/29/22, the Weight Summary revealed a weight of 181 pounds. On 12/14/22, the Weight Summary revealed a weight of 143.5 pounds. [Note: This was a 37.5 pound weight loss, 20.72 percent weight loss in 76 days.] A care plan dated 8/11/22 revealed, At risk for potential nutrition problem per inadequate oral intake, fluid deficit. A goal developed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-15 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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 ensure that a resident who was fed by enteral means received the appropriate treatment and services to restore, if possible, oral eating skills and to prevent complications. Specifically, for 1 out of 19 sampled residents, a resident's tube feeding was not infusing at the prescribed infusion rate. Resident identifier: 17. Findings included: Resident 17 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, tracheostomy, dependence on ventilator, dysphagia, cognitive communication deficit, chronic diastolic congestive heart failure, essential hypertension, rheumatoid arthritis, major depressive disorder, and need for assistance with personal care. On 12/12/22 at 4:12 PM, an observation was made of resident 17 lying asleep in bed with a family member (FM) in the room. Resident 17's tube feeding (TF) was infusing at 75 milliliters an hour (ml/hr) with 40 ml/hr of water flush. On the TF bag…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-15 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who need respiratory care were provided such care consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences. Specifically, for 2 out of 19 sampled residents, residents who required oxygen did not have a physician's order for oxygen. Resident identifiers: 91 and 103. Findings included: 1. Resident 91 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included displaced intertrochanteric fracture of left femur, other intraarticular fracture of lower end of left radius, history of falling, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, dehydration, nutritional anemia, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. On 12/13/22 at 11:49 AM, an interview was conducted with resident 91. Resident 91 was observed wearing oxygen with the nasal cannula properly placed. An observation was made that the oxygen tubing had no information as to when it was last…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-12-15 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that each resident's drug regimen was free from unnecessary drugs. An unnecessary drug is any drug when used in excessive dose; or for excessive duration; or without adequate monitoring; or without adequate indications for its use; or in the presence of adverse consequences which indicate the dose should be reduced or discontinued; or any combinations of the reasons above. Specifically, for 1 out of 19 sampled residents, the facility administered a narcotic within two hours of an antianxiety medication which was outside of the physician ordered parameters. Resident identifier: 18. Findings included: Resident 18 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dependence on ventilator, unspecified intracranial injury, epilepsy, type II diabetes hemiplegia and hemiparesis on left non-dominant side, dysphagia, and anxiety. On 12/15/22, resident 18's medical record review was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-15 · tag F0775 — isolatedKeep complete, dated laboratory records in the resident's record.
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 file laboratory reports that were dated and contained the name and address of the testing laboratory in the residents' clinical record. Specifically, for 2 out of 19 sampled residents, results of laboratory (lab) tests were not in the residents medical record and were not readily accessible. Resident identifiers: 97 and 103. Findings included: 1. Resident 97 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included fracture of left femur, presence of artificial hip joint, abnormalities of gait, muscle weakness, acute kidney failure, thrombocytopenia, hypertension, rheumatoid arthritis, benign prostatic hyperplasia, and insomnia. Resident 97 was transferred to the hospital on [DATE], for altered mental status. A review of the hospital discharge documents revealed that resident 97 had a urinary tract infection (UTI). The discharge document also revealed that resident 97 had a urinalysis (UA) and urine culture. Resident 97 was given a written…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to THE ENSIGN GROUP — 342 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4 of 5 | 3.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.7 | -1.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
The other 341 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 341; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MILESTONE HEALTHCARE LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 08/30/2013 |
| COSGRAVE, CORY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/07/2023 |
| HOOPES, TYLER | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2020 |
| FARNSWORTH, STEPHEN | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 04/01/2015 |
| BURNAM, SOON | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 08/30/2013 |
| KEETCH, CHAD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 03/01/2011 |
| SATO, AMI | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 09/09/2024 |
| NURSA INC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 04/01/2015 |
| PORT, BARRY | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 11/14/2025 |
| CORAL DESERT PROPERTIES, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2015 |
| ENSIGN SERVICES INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/01/2015 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 11 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
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 $932K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 10% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
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
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.
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 465160. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-11-21, 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.