Average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around December 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 Las Vegas during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
Failure to protect residents from repeated inappropriate sexual and physical contact. A cognitively impaired resident with a history of sexually aggressive behavior had a documented incident involving one resident and then additional incidents involving three other female residents, including grabbing, touching, and rubbing their knees/legs or hand. The resident also had multiple documented incidents toward staff, but the record lacked evidence that interventions were reassessed or revised despite the continued behaviors, and staff interviews showed some incidents were not reported to the state agency or consistently shared with the psych provider.
A resident with severely impaired cognition and diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy and anxiety had repeated sexual and physical intrusive behaviors involving both female residents and staff. Although the care plan included an initial incident and a revision date was entered, the interventions were not revised or updated, and the ED and LPN confirmed that additional interventions identified for monitoring and redirection were not added to the care plan.
Failure to Document Ordered Behavior Monitoring: A resident with severely impaired cognition, anxiety disorder, and metabolic encephalopathy had a physician order to monitor agitation and inappropriate sexual behavior, including interventions and outcomes. Review of the chart identified multiple sexual and physical behavior incidents, but the MAR and behavior monitoring report lacked documentation for most of them, and the behavior report recorded no behaviors observed. An APRN and the ED confirmed the facility was responsible for completing the monitoring, but it was not done on the reviewed incidents.
Failure to implement 1:1 feeding assistance care plan: A resident with hepatic encephalopathy, protein calorie malnutrition, and altered mental status was observed eating independently with no staff present despite a physician order and care plan for 1:1 feeding due to weight loss and poor meal intake. The RN confirmed the care plan was not followed, the CNA was unaware of the 1:1 requirement and provided only set-up/occasional supervision, and the RD confirmed the resident remained underweight and should have received 1:1 feeding for all meals.
Failure to provide ordered 1:1 feeding assistance for a resident with hepatic encephalopathy, protein-calorie malnutrition, altered mental status, and significant weight loss. The resident was observed eating breakfast alone despite an active physician order for 1:1 feeding, while the RN confirmed the order remained in place and the CNA acknowledged only providing setup and occasional supervision instead of continuous feeding assistance. The RD stated the resident was still underweight and needed 1:1 feeding for all meals.
A resident with protein-calorie malnutrition was recertified for hospice despite facility records showing improved intake and a significant weight gain. Hospice staff did not communicate with the RD, dietary team, or nurses, and the hospice NP’s recertification information described poor appetite, weight loss, and decline that did not match the facility’s documented meal intake and weight trends.
The facility failed to properly store food and maintain cleanliness of ice machines, posing potential health risks. An expired bottle of blackberry sauce was found in storage, and ice machines in the kitchen and nourishment rooms had debris buildup, despite claims of regular cleaning.
Two residents were not provided with information about their right to formulate an advance directive. One resident, who was cognitively intact, was unaware of advance directives and had a POLST filled out by an ex-spouse without their knowledge. Another resident, who is nonverbal, had a POLST completed by a niece without documented authorization. The facility failed to ensure residents' rights to self-determination and proper documentation of decision-making authority.
A facility failed to notify the state mental health authority after a resident with schizoaffective disorder, dementia, major depressive disorder, and bipolar disorder was involved in an altercation, leading to a Legal Discharge for acute treatment. The facility did not complete a necessary PASARR Level II referral, potentially depriving the resident of needed behavioral health services.
The facility failed to maintain current Nevada Automated Background System (NABS) clearance for four employees, including two CNAs and an LPN, as required by state law. The Staff Developer admitted to an oversight in ensuring that fingerprint-based background checks were completed within the required five-year timeframe.
A resident with multiple diagnoses eloped from the facility multiple times in one evening due to a door that remained open for a minute when buzzed remotely. Despite attempts to secure the resident with a Wonder Guard, the care plan was not revised with new interventions to prevent future incidents, as acknowledged by the Unit Manager and DON.
A resident with functional impairments was inappropriately discharged from a facility to an independent living home instead of a group home, as initially planned. The resident required maximum assistance for daily activities, but the discharge summary inaccurately documented their capabilities. The facility's discharge planning process was inadequate, lacking necessary documentation and follow-up, leading to potential risks for the resident's safety and well-being.
A facility failed to update a care plan after a resident-to-resident altercation involving two residents with complex medical histories. The incident involved physical aggression, and although no immediate injuries were noted, one resident was hospitalized later. The care plan for the resident who initiated the altercation was not revised to include preventative strategies, despite the facility's policy requiring updates after changes in condition. The ADON acknowledged the ineffectiveness of current interventions, and the lack of a designated person to ensure care plan updates contributed to the deficiency.
Failure to Protect Residents from Repeated Inappropriate Sexual and Physical Contact
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to protect residents from ongoing and repeated sexual and/or physical contact by a cognitively impaired resident with a history of continued repeated behaviors. Resident 2 had diagnoses including dementia with anxiety/psychotic disturbance, depression, and adult failure to thrive, and was documented as severely cognitively impaired and rarely/sometimes understood. A care plan noted dementia-related behavior and communication deficits, and the record documented a resident-to-resident sexual altercation in which a male resident grabbed Resident 2's right breast. Staff later documented that the two residents were separated and Resident 2's chest was assessed with no redness or bruises noted. Record review showed the male resident involved in the incident with Resident 2 had additional documented sexual and/or physical behaviors involving three other female residents after that event. Resident 7, who had diagnoses including recurrent major depressive disorder, traumatic brain injury history, and PTSD, was documented as having a hallway incident in which the resident approached, encroached on space, and placed a hand on Resident 7's knee, causing Resident 7 to yell for help. Resident 8, who had Alzheimer's disease, dementia with psychotic disturbance, altered mental status, and severely impaired cognition, was documented as having a resident place a hand and rub Resident 8's knee/leg. Resident 9, who had dementia with agitation and cognitive communication deficit and severe cognitive impairment, was documented as having a resident grab Resident 9 by the hand, causing Resident 9 to curse and yell. The male resident had diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy and other specified anxiety disorders, and was documented as severely cognitively impaired. His record included sexually aggressive verbal and physical behavior toward staff, a care plan for verbal aggression and inappropriate sexual behaviors, and a later care plan noting an incident of touching a female resident inappropriately. Additional record review identified 12 more documented incidents of sexual and/or physical behaviors toward staff from March through May 2026, but the medical record lacked documented evidence that interventions were reassessed, revised, or evaluated for effectiveness despite the continued behaviors. Interviews with facility staff reflected that some incidents involving female residents were known, but the incidents were not reported to the state agency and were not consistently reported to the psychiatric provider.
Care Plan Not Updated for Ongoing Intrusive Behaviors
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to reassess, revise, or reevaluate the effectiveness of care plan interventions for a resident with severely impaired cognitive skills who had repeated sexual and physical intrusive behaviors. The resident was admitted with diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy and other specified anxiety disorders. Record review showed four documented incidents involving female residents and 12 additional documented incidents involving staff from 01/18/2026 through 05/05/2026, yet the care plan dated 01/18/2026 only documented an initial incident of inappropriate touching and did not show documented evidence that interventions were revised or updated when the care plan revision date of 04/02/2026 was entered. Interviews confirmed that the revision date was entered without documented changes to the interventions. An APRN reported providing medication management and non-pharmacological interventions, and stated the facility was responsible for monitoring the resident and implementing interventions. An LPN acknowledged entering the revision date and confirmed no interventions were added, revised, or updated, and could not explain why the revision date was entered without documented changes. The ED also confirmed the revision date was entered without documented updates and stated additional interventions had been identified, including increased staffing for monitoring in the halls and moving the resident to a specific area following meals, but these interventions were not added to the care plan. The facility policy required monitoring the resident over time and updating the plan of care when changes occurred.
Failure to Document Ordered Behavior Monitoring
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement and accurately complete physician-ordered behavior monitoring for one resident with metabolic encephalopathy, other specified anxiety disorders, and severely impaired cognitive skills. The order, dated 11/17/2025, directed staff to monitor agitation and inappropriate sexual behavior, document interventions, chart to progress notes every shift, track the number of behavior episodes, and record whether outcomes were improved, worsened, or unchanged. Review of the resident’s record identified 14 incidents of sexual and/or physical behavior between 03/05/2026 and 05/05/2026. Record review showed the Medication Administration Record lacked documented evidence of behavior monitoring, interventions, and outcomes for 12 of the 14 incidents, and the Behavior Monitoring and Interventions Report lacked documented evidence for 13 of the 14 incidents. The Behavior Monitoring and Interventions Report also documented no behaviors observed. The APRN stated the facility was responsible for monitoring the resident and implementing interventions, and the ED confirmed behavior monitoring was not completed on the reviewed incident dates, although staff monitored the resident in other ways. The ED also stated behavior monitoring was intended to identify behavior triggers, trends, effectiveness of interventions, possible medication changes, and whether behaviors continued to occur.
Failure to Implement 1:1 Feeding Assistance Care Plan
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a care plan intervention for one-on-one feeding assistance was implemented for Resident 19, who was admitted with diagnoses including hepatic encephalopathy, protein calorie malnutrition, and altered mental status. On 01/07/2026 at 8:07 AM, the resident was observed seated in a chair by the bedside eating slowly and independently. The breakfast meal included scrambled eggs, bacon strips, and milk, and there were no staff members nearby or inside the room. A physician order dated 10/16/2025 documented 1:1 feeding assistance, and the RN confirmed at 8:24 AM that the resident had a care plan intervention for 1:1 feeding assistance due to weight loss and poor meal intakes. The RN also confirmed the resident was eating alone with no staff present and stated the care plan was not followed. The CNA assigned to the resident stated the resident only needed set-up and occasional supervision and was not aware of the 1:1 feeding care plan. The RD stated the dietary team was closely monitoring the resident for significant weight loss and confirmed the resident was to receive 1:1 feeding assistance for all meals, even though recent weights were stable and meal intakes had improved, because the resident remained underweight with a BMI of 14.5. The RD confirmed the care plan intervention was not implemented.
Failure to Provide Ordered 1:1 Feeding Assistance
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow a physician order for one-on-one feeding assistance for a resident with a history of hepatic encephalopathy, protein calorie malnutrition, altered mental status, and significant weight loss. The resident was admitted with a gaunt appearance and nonsensical speech, and the record showed a physician order dated 10/16/2025 to provide 1:1 feeding assistance after the interdisciplinary team determined the resident would benefit from it because of weight loss and poor meal intake. On 01/07/2026, the resident was observed eating breakfast alone in the room without staff present, despite the active order for 1:1 feeding assistance. The RN confirmed the order had been entered and remained active, and stated the resident had poor meal intake and was placed on 1:1 feeding assistance for that reason. The CNA assigned to the resident stated the resident only needed meal setup and occasional supervision, not 1:1 feeding assistance, and acknowledged the order was not followed. The RD stated the resident was still considered underweight and should continue to receive 1:1 feeding assistance for all meals, and this was the first time dietary staff learned the CNA was not providing the ordered assistance.
Hospice recertification based on incomplete nutritional information
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure hospice staff gathered and used information reflecting a resident’s improving nutritional status during hospice recertification for a resident with a primary hospice diagnosis of protein-calorie malnutrition. Resident 177 was admitted and later readmitted with diagnoses including protein-calorie malnutrition and hospice status, and the hospice-facility agreement required regular communication and documentation between hospice and facility staff. The resident was observed receiving 1:1 feeding assistance, eating 100% of breakfast, and asking for more bacon and later a snack because he was hungry. Facility records showed the resident had a significant weight gain of 5 pounds, or 5.4%, over a 30-day period, with average meal intakes documented at 64% to 85% and the gain described as significant, beneficial, and planned. Despite this information being available to the facility, hospice staff did not obtain input from the dietary team, RD, or nurses regarding the resident’s nutritional status before the hospice NP’s face-to-face encounter for recertification. The hospice DCO stated the resident was recertified for a new benefit period based on information that described poor appetite, one meal a day, weight loss, cachexia, and decline. The DCO stated hospice staff were not aware of the resident’s significant weight gain and that the facility’s meal intake documentation did not align with the hospice NP’s information. The DON confirmed the weight gain was available to hospice personnel before the face-to-face encounter and expected hospice personnel to gather information from the nurses, RD, and dietary team because they were more knowledgeable about the resident’s nutritional status. The hospice RN also stated she was not aware of the improved meal intake or significant weight gain because she had not spoken with the dietary team.
Improper Food Storage and Ice Machine Cleanliness
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper storage of food and cleanliness of ice machines, which posed a potential risk to safety and health standards. During an inspection, an open bottle of blackberry sauce with an expiration date of June 10, 2024, was found in the dry food storage area on November 19, 2024. The Dietary Director acknowledged that the blackberry sauce should have been discarded, indicating a lapse in following the facility's food safety protocols. Additionally, the facility did not maintain ice machines in a clean and sanitary state as required by their infection prevention and control guidelines. On September 4, 2024, an ice machine in the kitchen was observed with brownish spots on the inner ice shield, debris buildup on the metal lip between the lid and the opening of the ice chamber, and debris on the front grill covering the filter. Similar debris buildup was found on the ice spouts of machines in the 300-hall and 400-hall nourishment rooms. Despite the Dietary Director's claim that the ice machines were cleaned periodically, a subsequent inspection on November 22, 2024, revealed persistent debris buildup on the ice spouts of the 300 and 400 hall machines.
Failure to Inform Residents About Advance Directives
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents were provided with information about their right to formulate an advance directive, affecting two residents. Resident #74, who was admitted with diagnoses including Guillain-Barre Syndrome and dementia, was found to be cognitively intact and capable of making their own decisions. However, the resident was unaware of what advance directives were and had not been informed about them until the surveyor's interview. Despite having a Physician Order for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) filled out by an ex-spouse, the resident expressed a desire for resuscitation, indicating a lack of communication regarding their rights and preferences. Resident #5, who has aphasia and is nonverbal, was also affected by the facility's failure to provide adequate information about advance directives. The resident's POLST was filled out by a niece, but there was no documentation indicating that the resident had authorized the niece to make medical decisions on their behalf. The resident's medical record lacked evidence of a power of attorney or guardianship, and the facility acknowledged the need for a psychological evaluation to determine the resident's decision-making capacity. This oversight highlights the facility's failure to ensure residents' rights to self-determination and proper documentation of decision-making authority.
Failure to Notify State Authority of Resident's Significant Change in Condition
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to notify the appropriate state mental health authority promptly following a significant change in condition for a resident with mental health diagnoses. The resident, who was readmitted with schizoaffective disorder, unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance, major depressive disorder, and bipolar disorder, was involved in a resident-to-resident altercation. This incident resulted in the resident punching another resident, causing the latter to lose a tooth. Despite the resident being seen by psychiatric services immediately after the incident and a Legal Discharge being ordered for acute treatment, the facility did not complete a PASARR Level II referral, which was necessary due to the resident's psych change of condition. The Medical Records Director acknowledged that the bipolar diagnosis had not been added to the resident's list of diagnoses in the medical records system, despite being documented in the resident's Modified Data Set. The Medicaid Eligibility Specialist confirmed that a PASARR II referral should have been completed following the Legal Discharge due to the psych change of condition. The facility's failure to complete the PASARR Level II screening and notify the appropriate authorities potentially deprived the resident and others of necessary behavioral health services.
Failure to Maintain Current NABS Clearance for Employees
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that employee records contained evidence of current Nevada Automated Background System (NABS) clearance as required by Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 449.124. This deficiency was identified during a review of 19 employee records, where it was found that four employees (Employees 4, 5, 6, and 7) did not have evidence of fingerprint-based background checks being initiated and completed within five years from their prior screening date. Specifically, Employee 4, a Licensed Practical Nurse, had their last background check completed in September 2019; Employee 5, a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), in June 2019; Employee 6, also a CNA, in October 2019; and Employee 7, a Maintenance Assistant, in May 2019. The Staff Developer acknowledged responsibility for ensuring that each employee's screening was completed upon hire and then every five years. However, it was revealed that the fingerprints for some employees had been done but not yet submitted to NABS, indicating a delay in the process. The Staff Developer admitted that this was an oversight on the facility's part. The Administrator confirmed that a completed fingerprint-based background check with a NABS clearance letter was required for all employees, and the facility was expected to comply with state laws. The facility's policy and procedure documents also indicated compliance with state laws and regulations, yet the deficiency occurred due to the oversight in maintaining up-to-date background checks for the employees in question.
Failure to Revise Care Plan After Resident Elopement
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to revise the care plan for a resident after an elopement incident, which placed the resident at risk for inappropriate care, supervision, and accidents. The resident, who had diagnoses including seizures, epilepsy, autistic disorder, schizophrenia, and anxiety disorder, was found outside the facility multiple times in one evening. The initial incident occurred when a CNA opened the front door remotely for a visitor, and the resident was found in the street. Despite attempts to secure the resident with a Wonder Guard, the resident refused and became aggressive. The facility's investigation revealed that the door remained open for at least a minute when buzzed open remotely, which may have facilitated the elopement. The care plan for the resident documented the elopement but was not revised with new interventions to prevent future incidents. Both the Unit Manager and the Director of Nursing acknowledged that the care plan should have been updated with new strategies to ensure the resident's safety, as the existing interventions were ineffective.
Inappropriate Discharge of Resident with Functional Impairments
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure a safe and appropriate discharge for a resident with functional impairments, leading to potential risks of medical complications. The resident, who was cognitively intact, had multiple diagnoses including a fracture of the right pubis, generalized weakness, and a history of falls. Occupational and physical therapy evaluations indicated the resident required maximum assistance for various activities of daily living, including toileting and transfers. Despite these needs, the discharge summary inaccurately documented the resident's capabilities and stated that the resident's health had improved sufficiently for discharge to a group home with home health care services. However, the discharge process was flawed as the resident was actually sent to an independent living home, not a group home as initially believed by the facility staff. The hospice administrator confirmed that the independent living home did not provide 24-hour care, which was necessary for the resident's safety and well-being. The occupational therapist expressed concerns about the discharge destination, noting that the resident required assistance for transfers, particularly to the toilet, which was not feasible in an independent living setting. The facility's discharge planning process was inadequate, as evidenced by the lack of completed discharge documentation and follow-up for the resident. The social services director acknowledged the absence of necessary forms and documents, which should have included a discharge care plan and documented discussions with the resident or their representative. The case manager's notes were unclear and did not provide sufficient information for proper discharge planning, contributing to the inappropriate discharge of the resident.
Failure to Revise Care Plan After Resident Altercation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to revise the care plan for a resident after a resident-to-resident altercation, which involved two residents with complex medical histories. One resident, diagnosed with Alzheimer's Disease, dementia with psychotic disturbances, anxiety, depression, and schizophrenia, was involved in a physical altercation with another resident diagnosed with hepatic encephalopathy, cognitive communication deficit, altered mental status, alcohol abuse, depression, and anxiety disorder. The incident occurred when one resident blocked the other in a doorway, leading to a physical exchange where both residents kicked each other. Although no injuries were initially observed, one resident was later sent to the hospital due to a change in condition. The facility's investigation revealed that the care plan for the resident who initiated the altercation was not updated to include preventative strategies following the incident. The Assistant Director of Nursing acknowledged that the interventions in place were ineffective, as evidenced by the recurrence of altercations. Despite the facility's policy requiring care plan updates following changes in a resident's condition, the care plan for the involved resident was not revised, highlighting a deficiency in ensuring appropriate care and supervision. The lack of a designated person to ensure care plan updates contributed to this oversight.
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 514 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 Las Vegas
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Advanced Health Care Of Summerlin | 1.9 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Marquis Plaza Regency Post Acute Rehab | 2 mi | ★★★★★ | 23 | 0 |
| Silver Ridge Healthcare Center | 2.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 14 | 0 |
| Neurorestorative | 2.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 16 | 0 |
| Torrey Pines Post Acute And Rehabilitation | 2.5 mi | ★★★★★ | 7 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Life Care Center Of Las Vegas.
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 July 2026) and official state health department websites.