7991 W 71st Ave, Arvada, CO 80004 · Jefferson County · (303) 403-3100
110 certified beds, about 104 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1994
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 065330 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 30, 2024, inspectors cited 7 health deficiencies (the Colorado average is 8.7, the national average 9.2).
Of 20 health citations since January 2022, 4 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 3 fines totaling $22,271 in the last three years; the largest was $10,036, and the latest is dated February 18, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.42 hours per resident per day, against 3.72 across Colorado and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.51 of those hours.
56.0% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Colorado average 47.1%).
CMS links it to Long Peak Operating Company, an affiliated group of 8 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 20 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for one (#1) of three residents reviewed for accidents out of three sample residents. Resident #1 was admitted on [DATE] for long-term care with a diagnosis of dementia. According to the care plan, Resident #1 was determined to be a high fall risk. The resident was independent with ambulation. On 1/16/26 Resident #1 was found on the floor in another resident's room. The resident was not wearing appropriate footwear at the time of fall. After the fall, Resident #1 was not able to walk and required the use of a wheelchair. Resident #1 did not participate in her usual daily activities, her pain level increased and she was confused. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure one (#93) of three residents reviewed for nutrition received the care and services necessary to meet their nutritional needs and maintain their highest physical well-being out of 51 sample residents. Resident #93 was admitted to the facility for long term care on 3/27/24 with diagnoses of severe dementia with mood disturbance, hypothyroidism (underactive thyroid), depression and dysphagia of the oropharyngeal stage (food sticks to the mouth or throat or gets pocketed in cheeks). Upon admission [DATE]), Resident #93 weighed 114.6 pounds (lbs). On 4/4/24 the facility placed the resident on restorative dining services, however, observations during the survey revealed the resident did not receive consistent assistance at meals. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were treated with dignity in two out of four dining rooms. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure an adequate system was in place to provide meal service in a timely fashion to residents waiting to be served their meals in the Aspen and Pine Ridge dining rooms, which resulted in some residents at the same table receiving their meals 40 to50 minute after other residents; and, -Ensure residents were treated with respect and dignity by staff in the dining rooms, including engaging with residents and addressing residents by his/her preferred name.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to honor resident choices for three (#56, #6 and #65) of five residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL) out of 51 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure Resident #56, Resident #6 and Resident #65 received two showers a week per their preferences; and, -Ensure Resident #65 was assisted with a leg catheter bag on Sundays when he was attending church.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was less than five percent (%). Specifically, the facility had a medication error rate of 16.1%, or five errors out of 31 opportunities for error.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to employ an infection preventionist (IP) who had completed specialized training in infection prevention and control. Specifically, the facility failed to have a qualified IP involved with the facility's infection prevention and control program.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure two (#56 and #21) of five residents reviewed for oxygen therapy was provided respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice out of 51 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure Resident #56's CPAP (continuous positive airway pressure) machine was working appropriately and used as ordered by the physician; and, -Ensure Resident #21 was wearing oxygen as ordered by the physician.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to post nurse staffing information daily. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Post the daily number of hours worked for each nursing staff category in a clear and readable format.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided prompt efforts by the facility to resolve any grievances for six (#65, #6, #81, #92, #58 and #87) of ten residents reviewed for grievances out of 51 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure grievances regarding competency of agency staff were followed up timely with a satisfactory resolution for Residents #65, #6, #81, #92, #58 and #87.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, observations and record review, the facility failed to ensure one (#3) of three out of six sample residents were free from significant medication errors. Specifically, the facility failed ensure Resident #3 was administered anticoagulant medication (Pradaxa) for atrial fibrillation per physician's orders. The facility failed to ensure the resident's anticoagulant prescription was picked up from a specified pharmacy by facility staff and brought to the facility. This failure resulted in Resident #3 not being administered the anticoagulant medication for a total of nine doses from [DATE] to [DATE]. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to implement nutritional interventions for one (#89) of four residents reviewed for nutritional parameters out of 37 sample residents to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status. Resident #89, age [AGE], was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of dementia, post traumatic stress disorder, chronic kidney disease stage three, previous head injury with loss of consciousness, left side paralysis following a stroke, epilepsy, prostate enlargement, vitamin D deficiency, urinary incontinence, restlessness and agitation, depression and influenza (flu). Resident #89 sustained a weight loss of 9.9% (17.6 lbs) from admission on [DATE] through 2/26/23, and an 11% (20.2 lbs) weight loss from admission to 3/12/23, which was considered significant. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident representative was notified for one (#89) of five residents reviewed out of 37 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure Resident #89's representative was notified of his significant weight loss.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure proper treatment and assistive device to maintain hearing and vision abilities for two (#32 and #29) of three residents reviewed for vision and hearing out of 37 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Provide working hearing aids and repair glasses for Resident #32; and, -Offer Resident #29 audiology services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident with limited mobility receives appropriate equipment, and assistance to maintain or improve mobility for one (#26) of three residents reviewed for limited range of motion out of 37 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to provide the resident with a hand splint and assistance for right hand contracture.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure inspection and maintenance of a halo safety ring (fixed bed rail assistive device) for one (#29) of two residents using bed halo (type of bed rail) for positioning out of 37 sample residents. Specifically, for Resident #29, the facility failed to: -Inspect and regularly check the mattress and halo safety ring for areas of possible entrapment; -Check bed rail/halo safety ring regularly for ongoing maintenance to make sure device was still installed correctly as rails may shift or loosen over time; and, -Ensured the bedrail/halo safety ring was securely attached to the resident bed frame and prevented unstable movement and wobbling of the assistive device.
Inspectors wroteIII. Incidents of physical abuse between Resident #2 and Resident #91 A. Facility investigation of incident on 12/1/21 The 12/1/21 abuse investigation was provided by the NHA on 1/4/21 at 1:00 p.m. The report was completed by the social services director (SSD). The report indicated the following: On 12/1/21, in the morning, Resident #91 allegedly came up on the side of Resident #2 and asked if she could borrow her phone three times. Resident #2 stated all three times she did not have a phone. Resident #2 said that Resident #91 hit her on her arm seven to eight times. No care partner or other resident witnessed actual contact and video footage was unsuccessful in showing if contact was made and how many times. Both residents were placed on frequent checks for safety. A RN skin assessment was conducted on Resident #2. Resident #91 was severely cognitively impaired. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident who displayed or was diagnosed with dementia, received the appropriate treatment and services to attain or maintain his or her highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for three (#92, #91, and #36) of 10 residents out of 40 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to effectively identify person-centered approaches for dementia care to prevent resident-to-resident altercations for Residents #92, #91, and #36.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to consistently provide activities of daily living (ADL) support for one (#38) of six dependent residents reviewed for ADLs out of 40 sample residents. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Provide timely incontinence care and reposition Resident #38 who was dependent on staff for all care; and, -Provide appropriate assessed level of supervision for Resident #38 while the resident used the toilet.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure two (#75 and #87) of three residents reviewed for respiratory care out of 40 sample residents were provided respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice. Specifically, the facility failed to: -Ensure Resident #75 had orders, care plan, and set up and cleaning assistance with use of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) machine, and; -Ensure Resident #87 was assisted with the setup of the oxygen concentrator at night.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the correct installation, use and maintenance of transfer bar, (fixed bed rail assistive device) for one (#62) of two residents using bed canes (type of bed rail) for positioning out of 40 sample residents. Specifically, for Resident #62 the facility did not: -Inspect, evaluate, maintain, and upgrade equipment (beds/mattresses/bed rails) to identify and remove potential fall and entrapment hazards, including: -Ensure the bed cane was securely attached to the resident bed frame prevent unstable movement and wobbling of the assistive device; -Prevent gaps between the bed cane and the mattress large enough for the resident to have a body part become potentially entrapped within; and, -Review the manufacturer's recommendations for installation and ongoing maintenance of the assistive device.
13 fire safety citations on file: 12 on July 30, 2024, 1 on March 16, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| February 18, 2026 | Fine | $4,305 |
| July 30, 2024 | Fine | $7,930 |
| March 13, 2024 | Fine | $10,036 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Colorado | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.42 | 3.72 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.51 | 0.82 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.10 | 3.29 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.23 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.69 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 56.0% | 47.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 46.7% | 44.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.66 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.56 on weekdays and 3.10 on weekends, 13% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 8.7% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.30 in April to June 2025 to 3.42 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.42 | 0.51 | 3.56 | 3.10 | 8.7% | 0 of 90 | 104 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.49 | 0.53 | 3.62 | 3.18 | 9.2% | 0 of 92 | 103 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.36 | 0.51 | 3.49 | 3.04 | 8.6% | 0 of 92 | 106 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.30 | 0.51 | 3.45 | 2.91 | 10.3% | 0 of 91 | 107 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Colorado, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.59 | 0.76 | 3.75 | 3.18 | 5.9% | 0.2% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Colorado, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $22.78 | $21.42 to $24.00 | 22,240 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $35.52 | $29.76 to $38.37 | 4,920 |
| Registered nurses | $48.20 | $40.67 to $52.37 | 54,490 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Colorado | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 10.4 | 13.4 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.0 | 3.4 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.6 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.7 | 13.3 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.6 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 15.8 | 20.0 | 15.4 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Arbor View Care Center, LLC's Medicare short-stay residents. How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 51.5% · Colorado: 39 better, 8 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 22 eligible stays.
10.2% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Colorado: 3 better, 0 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 30 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 7.1% · Colorado: 4 better, 0 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 18 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Colorado65.0% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 7 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Colorado0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 9 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Colorado0.0% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 9 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Colorado99.5% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 3 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: ARBOR VIEW CARE CENTER LLC. CMS links this home to Long Peak Operating Company, a group of 8 nursing homes averaging 2.8 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arbor View Care Holdings LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 07/01/2024 |
| Long Peak Opco LLC | Direct ownership interest | Organization | 07/01/2024 | |
| Raskin, Chaim | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Haskell, Cynthia | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Koretke, Mary | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Moskowitz, Jay | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Valle, Karla | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Beecan Health Co LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 07/01/2024 | |
| Foster, Joseph | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Beecan Health Co LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/31/2025 | |
| Dergance, Jeannae | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Foster, Joseph | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/22/2021 | |
| Haskell, Cynthia | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Koretke, Mary | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Moskowitz, Jay | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Raskin, Chaim | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Valle, Karla | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2024 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Colorado. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.