Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
Past the typical resurvey interval — a standard survey could occur at any time
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of July 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Advance Health Care Of Scottsdale during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment and a history of trauma was the subject of a sexual abuse allegation that was not reported to law enforcement or APS, despite facility policy and regulatory requirements. Staff and administration acknowledged the incident but did not notify the required agencies, citing uncertainty and advice from the ombudsman.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment and a complex medical history was the subject of a sexual abuse allegation that was not reported to the State Agency, law enforcement, or APS within the required timeframe. Despite care plan changes and staff awareness of reporting requirements, the facility delayed and omitted notifications, resulting in a deficiency related to mandated abuse reporting.
A resident with multiple medical conditions and moderate cognitive impairment had an allegation of sexual abuse that was not documented in the clinical record, despite facility policy requiring such documentation. Nursing staff and the DON confirmed that abuse allegations should be recorded in progress notes, but the responsible RN did not document the incident. The facility's policies mandate incident documentation, yet no record of the allegation was found.
The facility failed to inform residents in advance of the risks and benefits of proposed care for opioid medications via informed consent. This deficiency was identified through closed clinical record reviews, staff interviews, and facility policy reviews. The lack of informed consent for opioid medications was confirmed by the DON and clinical nurse manager, who both stated that obtaining consents for opioid medications was not part of their protocol.
The facility failed to maintain hot water temperatures within the required range in resident kitchenette areas, with temperatures exceeding 120 degrees Fahrenheit in multiple rooms. This deficiency was observed in three residents' rooms and a vacant room, posing a risk of burns to the residents.
A resident with multiple diagnoses had medications administered late on two occasions, with no documented reasons for the delays. Interviews revealed that the LPN was new and prioritized safety, while the DON acknowledged situational delays. The facility's policy emphasizes timely administration, which was not followed.
Failure to Report Sexual Abuse Allegation to Law Enforcement and APS
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to correctly develop and implement its abuse policy following an allegation of sexual abuse involving a resident with moderate cognitive impairment and a complex medical history, including traumatic subdural hemorrhage and acute kidney failure. The resident was unable to answer orientation questions and appeared confused at the time of the incident. A grievance was filed regarding a male CNA providing care, and the care plan was updated to specify female caregivers only, referencing the resident's history of trauma from sexual assault. However, there was no documentation in the clinical record of an explicit allegation of sexual abuse. Despite the facility submitting a self-report to the State Agency regarding an allegation of staff-to-resident sexual abuse, there was no evidence that law enforcement or Adult Protective Services (APS) were notified as required. Staff interviews revealed an understanding that abuse allegations should be reported immediately or within 24 hours, and that reporting to law enforcement and APS was necessary. However, both the DON and the Administrator confirmed that they did not report the incident to law enforcement or APS, with the Administrator stating that she believed reporting to these agencies was optional and that the ombudsman advised against contacting APS. Review of facility policy and state and federal regulations confirmed that all alleged or suspected abuse must be promptly reported to appropriate authorities, including law enforcement and APS. The facility's failure to report the allegation to these agencies was inconsistent with both its own policy and regulatory requirements. The deficiency was identified through clinical record review, interviews, and policy review, and was documented in the State Agency complaint tracking system.
Failure to Timely Report Alleged Sexual Abuse to Required Authorities
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that an allegation of sexual abuse involving a resident was reported to the State Agency, law enforcement, and Adult Protective Services (APS) within the required timeframe. The resident involved had a complex medical history, including traumatic subdural hemorrhage, acute kidney failure, and moderate cognitive impairment, as indicated by a BIMS score of 11. Documentation showed that the resident's mental status fluctuated, with periods of alertness, confusion, and agitation. A grievance was filed by the resident's daughter regarding a male CNA providing care, which led to interventions such as assigning only female caregivers and initiating trauma-informed care measures. Despite the grievance and subsequent care plan changes indicating a possible sexual assault, the facility did not document the allegation of sexual abuse in the clinical record. The self-report to the State Agency was made several days after the initial grievance, and there was no evidence that law enforcement or APS were notified as required by both facility policy and state law. Interviews with staff, including CNAs, RNs, the DON, and the Administrator, revealed inconsistent understanding and application of reporting timeframes and requirements. The Administrator and DON acknowledged the allegation but chose not to report to law enforcement or APS, citing the vagueness of the allegation and advice from the ombudsman. Facility policy and federal regulations require immediate reporting of abuse allegations to appropriate authorities, including law enforcement and APS, especially when there is reasonable suspicion of a crime against a resident. The facility's failure to report the allegation in a timely manner, and to all required agencies, constituted a deficiency in protecting residents from potential abuse. The deficiency was further compounded by the lack of documentation and the decision to rely on subjective judgment rather than established reporting protocols.
Failure to Document Sexual Abuse Allegation in Clinical Record
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that an allegation of sexual abuse involving a resident was completely and accurately documented in the clinical record. The resident in question had multiple medical diagnoses, including traumatic subdural hemorrhage, acute kidney failure, and moderate cognitive impairment as indicated by a BIMS score of 11. Despite a grievance being filed regarding a care issue involving a male CNA and the resident's care plan being updated to reflect a history of trauma and a preference for female caregivers, there was no documentation in the clinical record of the sexual abuse allegation. Interviews with nursing staff and the Director of Nursing confirmed that facility policy required documentation of abuse allegations in the clinical record, specifically in the progress notes. Staff acknowledged that such documentation should include details of the allegation, actions taken to protect the resident, and notifications made. However, the RN who received the report of sexual abuse did not document the incident in the clinical record, stating she was following instructions given to her. Policy review revealed that any incident should be charted every shift for 72 hours and then daily until resolved, and that changes in a resident's condition, including incidents or injuries, must be recorded in the medical record. Despite these policies, there was no evidence in the clinical record of the sexual abuse allegation for the resident, resulting in incomplete and inaccurate documentation.
Failure to Obtain Informed Consent for Opioid Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to inform residents #32, #195, #4, and #146 in advance of the risks and benefits of proposed care for opioid medications via informed consent. This deficiency was identified through closed clinical record reviews, staff interviews, and facility policy reviews. The lack of informed consent for opioid medications was confirmed by the Director of Nursing (DON) and clinical nurse manager, who both stated that obtaining consents for opioid medications was not part of their protocol. The facility's policy on resident rights clearly states that residents have the right to be informed in advance of the risks and benefits of proposed care, which was not adhered to in these cases. Resident #146, admitted with multiple diagnoses including a wedge compression fracture and muscle spasms, was prescribed oxycodone for pain management. Despite the presence of pain scale and side effects monitoring in the medical record, there was no evidence of a signed consent for opioid medications. The DON and clinical nurse manager both confirmed that opioid consents were not obtained, as it was not part of their protocol. Similarly, Resident #195, who was alert and oriented with a BIMS score of 15, was prescribed oxycodone for pain management without a signed consent for opioid medications. Resident #32, with moderate cognitive impairment, and Resident #4, with moderate cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, were also administered opioid medications without informed consent. The facility's failure to obtain informed consent for opioid medications was consistent across all reviewed cases, indicating a systemic issue in adhering to the policy on resident rights to be informed of the risks and benefits of their treatment.
Hot Water Temperature Exceeds Safe Range in Resident Rooms
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for three residents by not ensuring that hot water temperatures in resident kitchenette areas were within the required range. Resident #32, who has moderate cognitive impairment, was observed with a hot water temperature of 124.3 degrees Fahrenheit in their kitchenette. Resident #25, who is cognitively intact, had a hot water temperature of 125.2 degrees Fahrenheit in their kitchenette. Resident #344, who has multiple diagnoses including dementia, had a hot water temperature of 122 degrees Fahrenheit in their kitchenette. Additionally, a vacant room had a hot water temperature of 121 degrees Fahrenheit in the kitchenette sink. These temperatures exceed the facility's policy range of 110-120 degrees Fahrenheit for resident areas, posing a risk of burns to the residents. The administrator and maintenance director were informed of the findings, and the maintenance director acknowledged that the hot water temperatures were above the acceptable range. The maintenance director attributed the issue to recent plumbing work that involved turning off and draining the hot water tanks, which may have caused temporary temperature fluctuations. Despite weekly checks of water temperatures, the maintenance director admitted that the temperatures in the resident rooms on the identified wing were not within the required range at the time of the survey. The facility's water temperature policy, dated July 25, 2023, states that hot water temperatures in resident areas should be between 110-120 degrees Fahrenheit. However, the observations during the survey revealed that several kitchenette sinks in resident rooms exceeded this range. The maintenance director provided evidence of the plumbing work and stated that the facility had taken steps to ensure proper operation of the pipes and mixer, but the temperatures still exceeded the acceptable range during the survey.
Failure to Administer Medications as Ordered
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure medications were administered as ordered by the physician for Resident #195. The resident, who was admitted with multiple diagnoses including a wedge compression fracture, chronic atrial fibrillation, depression, long-term use of anticoagulants, and chest pain, had specific medication orders for Duloxetine, Eliquis, Escitalopram, and Pantoprazole. These medications were documented to have been administered late by half an hour to an hour on two separate occasions. There was no documentation explaining the reason for the delayed administration in the clinical record. Interviews with the resident revealed that the medications were consistently delayed, and on one occasion, a dose of Eliquis was missed and later remedied. The LPN responsible for administering the medications admitted to being new to the facility and prioritizing safety, which sometimes led to delays. The Director of Nursing acknowledged that medication administration could be late depending on the situation but did not provide a clear protocol for handling such delays. The facility's policy on medication administration emphasizes the importance of administering medications at the right time, which was not adhered to in this case.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 288 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 2 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Scottsdale
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Life Care Center Of Scottsdale | 0.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 9 | 0 |
| Shea Post Acute Rehabilitation Center | 0.8 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Sante Of North Scottsdale | 4.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Phoenix Mountain Post Acute | 6.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 6 | 0 |
| Arizona State Veteran Home-phx | 6.3 mi | ★★★★★ | 2 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Advance Health Care Of Scottsdale.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 2026) and official state health department websites.