Above average — CMS composite of the measures below.
A standard survey is most likely before around November 2026
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 Life Care Center Of Scottsdale during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with multiple medical conditions, but no diagnoses or orders supporting Duloxetine or Omeprazole, was given these two medications in error when an RN took over a partially completed med pass from an agency nurse who had been sent home. The RN, relying on incomplete handoff information, accessed the wrong EMAR, did not properly verify the resident’s identity against the MAR, and did not observe the resident during medication ingestion. Only after administration did the RN realize the EMAR mix-up, by which time the resident had already taken the unordered Duloxetine 30 mg and Omeprazole 20 mg, contrary to facility policy requiring adherence to the 10 rights of medication administration and proper resident identification.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment was involved in an incident where a CNA allegedly frightened and verbally threatened her. Although the event was reported and investigated by facility staff, there was no documentation of the abuse allegation in the resident's medical record, despite facility policy requiring such documentation. Staff interviews confirmed that this omission was not in line with professional standards and facility procedures.
A resident with paraplegia and multiple sclerosis developed additional pressure ulcers due to inadequate care and documentation lapses in a facility. Despite being at high risk, the resident was not consistently turned or repositioned, leading to new pressure ulcers on the sacrum and right heel. The facility's records inaccurately documented the resident's skin condition at discharge, and staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in following skin assessment and care protocols.
The facility failed to ensure refrigerated food was not expired, as observed with a container of horseradish past its best used by date. The Dietary Manager discarded it but initially believed it could be used for up to a year after the date, contrary to facility policy. Interviews revealed inconsistencies in policy understanding among staff, leading to the deficiency.
A facility failed to involve a resident and their representative in the care planning process. Despite the resident's son being designated as the healthcare agent, there was no evidence that the baseline care plan was reviewed with them within 48 hours of admission. The resident's family requested information and a case manager's call, but there was no record of follow-up. Interviews with staff confirmed the absence of required documentation and involvement, contrary to facility policies.
A resident with multiple health issues, including a fracture and diabetes, was found with unexplained bruising due to inadequate supervision and failure to follow the care plan. Despite requiring assistance for mobility, the resident often ambulated to the bathroom unassisted. Staff interviews revealed communication lapses and failure to report incidents, contributing to the deficiency.
The facility failed to properly assess and document wound care for three residents, leading to a deficiency in care. A resident with a stage 4 pressure ulcer did not receive a recommended low air loss bed, and wound care was inconsistently documented. Another resident had a gap in wound assessments, and a third resident's surgical site was not assessed until days after admission. Staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in wound assessment practices, and facility policies on timely wound assessments and adherence to physician orders were not consistently followed.
A resident admitted with a femur fracture developed pressure wounds that were not assessed or treated in a timely manner. Despite initial documentation of a blister on the right heel, there was no assessment or physician's order for treatment until several days later. The facility's policies on wound management were not followed, leading to a deficiency in care.
Unordered Medications Administered Due to EMAR and Identification Errors
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident received only medications ordered by a physician, resulting in the administration of two medications that were not prescribed for that resident. The resident had been admitted with diagnoses including hypo-osmolality and hyponatremia, acute skin changes due to ultraviolet radiation, dysphagia, difficulty walking, and an unspecified malignant neoplasm of the skin of the left lower limb, including the hip. Review of the order summary showed no orders for Duloxetine 30 mg or Omeprazole 20 mg, and the resident’s diagnoses and Minimum Data Set contained no indications of depression, anxiety, GERD, or other psychiatric or mood disorders that would support those medications. Despite this, the resident received Omeprazole 20 mg and Duloxetine 30 mg, which were not ordered for them. According to staff interviews and documentation, an agency nurse had been in the middle of a medication pass when the facility decided to send the agency nurse home and replace them with a staff RN. The agency nurse, reportedly upset about being sent home, did not provide a full report, leaving the RN to determine where the medication pass had been left off. The RN was informed that the resident had not received their medications and proceeded to administer morning medications, but did so using the wrong electronic medication administration record. The RN did not verify the correct resident EMAR before administration and did not observe the resident taking the medications. After administering the medications, the RN realized the error upon reviewing the EMAR, then called out to the resident to stop taking them, but the resident had already ingested Omeprazole and Duloxetine. The facility’s medication administration policy required adherence to the 10 rights of medication administration and verification of resident identity by verbal confirmation and visual checks of name and photo, or alternative methods if no photo was available.
Failure to Document Staff-to-Resident Abuse Allegation in Medical Record
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency was identified when the facility failed to ensure that an incident involving staff-to-resident abuse was completely documented in the clinical record for one resident. The resident, who had multiple medical diagnoses including moderate cognitive impairment, was involved in an incident where a CNA allegedly frightened her, removed her brief, and made threatening and derogatory statements. The incident was reported by an occupational therapist to the DON, and the facility initiated an investigation, including interviews with the resident, her family, and the CNA involved. Despite the investigation and multiple staff interviews confirming the expectation that such allegations should be documented in the resident's clinical record, a review of the resident's medical record revealed no documentation of the incident. Staff interviews confirmed that facility policy required allegations of abuse to be recorded in progress notes, including details of the event, statements from the resident, and the status of the resident. The absence of this documentation was acknowledged by both nursing and administrative staff during interviews. Facility policies reviewed indicated that nursing documentation should reflect all significant events, including allegations of abuse, to ensure accurate communication among the interdisciplinary team and to provide a complete picture of the resident's experience. The policy on abuse investigations also required review of pertinent records, such as progress notes, as part of the investigative process. The failure to document the abuse allegation in the clinical record constituted a breach of these policies and professional standards.
Failure to Prevent and Manage Pressure Ulcers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate care and services to prevent the development and worsening of pressure ulcers for a resident with major depressive disorder, paraplegia, and multiple sclerosis. Upon admission, the resident had an open wound on the left heel and blanchable redness on the coccyx. The care plan included weekly skin checks and daily wound care for the left heel, but there was no mention of other wounds. The resident required maximal assistance for repositioning, yet documentation showed lapses in turning and repositioning, with significant periods where the resident was not turned or repositioned. Despite the resident's risk for pressure ulcers, the facility's documentation and care were insufficient. Physician orders for wound care were not comprehensive, initially addressing only the left heel. New orders were added later for a right heel blister and sacral wound care, but these were reactive rather than preventive. The facility's records showed a lack of consistent documentation for turning and repositioning, contributing to the development of additional pressure ulcers on the sacrum and right heel, which were not present at admission. Interviews with the resident's son and facility staff highlighted discrepancies in the facility's documentation and care practices. The son's observations at discharge contradicted the facility's records, which inaccurately stated the resident's skin was intact. The Director of Nursing and a Registered Nurse described expected procedures for skin assessments and reporting, but these were not consistently followed. The facility's policy required reporting and treatment of any skin changes, but the lack of timely interventions and documentation led to the resident's worsening condition.
Expired Food Handling Deficiency
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that refrigerated food was not expired, as observed during an initial tour of the kitchen. A container of horseradish was found in the refrigerator with a best used by date that had already passed. The Dietary Manager, upon being informed, discarded the horseradish. However, during an interview, the Dietary Manager mentioned that they believed the horseradish could be used for up to a year after the best used by date, which contradicts the facility's policy. Further interviews with the Consultant Dietitian and the Administrator revealed inconsistencies in the understanding and implementation of the facility's policy regarding expired food. The Consultant Dietitian stated that food could be used after the best if used by/before date, depending on quality and flavor, but admitted not having tested the horseradish. The Administrator confirmed that expired food should be discarded and expressed that the Dietary Manager should adhere to the policy, which did not list horseradish as an exception. This lack of adherence to policy and miscommunication among staff led to the deficiency.
Failure to Involve Resident and Representative in Care Planning
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that a resident and their representative were provided opportunities to participate in the care and treatment planning process. Resident #148, who was admitted with diagnoses including subdural hemorrhage, cognitive communication deficit, and atrial fibrillation, had a Health Care Power of Attorney designating her son as her agent for healthcare matters. However, the clinical record showed no evidence that the baseline care plan was reviewed with the resident or her representative within 48 hours of admission, nor was there a signed baseline care plan signature sheet. Further issues arose when the resident's daughter-in-law requested information regarding the resident's care plan, medication list, and health, and asked for a call from a case manager. Despite the resident giving verbal consent for her son and daughter-in-law to receive information, there was no evidence that a case manager returned the call. Additionally, the resident's son expressed frustration over not being contacted about his mother's care plan, and although a care conference was suggested, there was no evidence that the resident or her representative attended the IDT meeting. Interviews with facility staff, including an LPN, Social Services Director, HIM Director, and DON, revealed that the baseline care plan should have been signed by the resident or family and documented in the clinical record. However, there was no evidence of such documentation, nor were there progress notes indicating that the family had been contacted regarding their concerns. Facility policies reviewed indicated that residents and their representatives should be involved in care planning, but these procedures were not followed, leading to the deficiency.
Inadequate Supervision Leads to Resident Injury
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure adequate supervision and prevent accidents for a resident, identified as Resident #145, who was admitted with multiple diagnoses including a fracture of the left humerus, heart failure, and diabetes. The resident's care plan required assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) and mobility, and noted the resident was at risk for falls. Despite these interventions, the resident was found with a lump and bruising on her right lower back, which she could not explain. The facility's investigation revealed that the resident often ambulated to the bathroom unassisted, contrary to her care plan, which required assistance. Interviews with staff indicated a lack of consistent communication and adherence to the care plan. A CNA reported that the resident would often take herself to the bathroom and only use the call bell for assistance after the fact. Another CNA mentioned that the resident had hit her back on the toilet but did not report this incident to the nurse. The Director of Nursing (DON) stated that staff should follow care plan interventions and report any incidents or injuries, but there was no documentation of the incident in the progress notes or skin assessments. The facility's policies on resident rights and incident management emphasize the need for a safe environment and adequate supervision to prevent accidents. However, the failure to implement these policies and ensure staff adherence to the care plan resulted in the resident sustaining an unexplained injury. The lack of documentation and communication among staff further contributed to the deficiency, as the resident's needs for assistance were not consistently met.
Deficient Wound Care and Assessment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents' wounds were assessed and treated according to professional standards for three residents, leading to a deficiency in care. Resident #11, who was admitted with osteomyelitis and a stage 4 pressure ulcer, did not receive a low air loss bed as recommended upon discharge from the hospital. Additionally, wound care was not consistently documented, with only 5 out of 9 opportunities recorded, and there was a lack of measurements and assessments for the surgical repair of the ulcer. Interviews with staff revealed inconsistencies in wound assessment practices and documentation. Resident #4, admitted for surgical aftercare, had three surgical wounds that required monitoring. However, there was a gap in wound assessments from 4/25/24 until 5/2/2024, with no notes on two of the wounds. Staff interviews indicated that the first recorded measurement of the wound was on 5/2/2024, highlighting a lapse in timely wound assessment and documentation. Resident #19, admitted with a hip fracture, did not have a wound assessment documented for the surgical site. The first wound assessment was conducted on 6/4/2024, which included measurements and descriptions. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the lack of initial wound assessments and the need for measurements to evaluate wound healing. Facility policies emphasized the importance of timely wound assessments and adherence to physician orders, which were not consistently followed in these cases.
Failure to Assess and Treat Pressure Wounds
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper assessment and treatment of pressure wounds for a resident, leading to a deficiency in care. The resident was admitted with a nondisplaced fracture of the femur and initially had no pressure ulcers according to hospital records. However, upon admission, a clear blister was noted on the resident's right heel, and the resident was supposed to be seen by the wound team. Despite this, there was no documented assessment or physician's order for treatment of the wounds from admission until several days later, indicating a lack of timely intervention. The facility's documentation revealed that the resident's care plan did not include pressure ulcers or the risk of developing them, and the admission MDS was incomplete in relevant sections. Observations and interviews with nursing staff indicated that the resident's wounds were not assessed or measured promptly, and there was a lack of communication and documentation regarding the condition of the resident's heels. The wound team was scheduled to visit only twice a week, and floor nurses were responsible for measurements when the team was not present, but this process was not effectively implemented. The Director of Nursing acknowledged the absence of a wound nurse and stated that pressure ulcer assessments should be done promptly, with a blister being classified as a stage 2 pressure ulcer. Facility policies emphasized the need for timely assessment and treatment of wounds, but these were not adhered to in this case. The lack of immediate assessment and treatment of the resident's pressure wounds represents a failure to provide care consistent with professional standards, as outlined in the facility's policies.
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 282 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shea Post Acute Rehabilitation Center | 0.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Advance Health Care Of Scottsdale | 0.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 3 | 0 |
| Sante Of North Scottsdale | 4.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Phoenix Mountain Post Acute | 6 mi | ★★★★★ | 6 | 0 |
| Vi At Grayhawk, A Vi And Plaza Companies Community | 6.3 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Life Care Center 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.