2325 E. Harmon Ave., Las Vegas, NV 89119 · Clark County · (702) 798-7990
120 certified beds, about 115 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 2000
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 295076 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on May 27, 2026, inspectors cited 10 health deficiencies (the Nevada average is 9.7, the national average 9.2).
Of 36 health citations since November 2023, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (2 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $27,378 in the last three years; the largest was $27,378, and the latest is dated May 27, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.84 hours per resident per day, against 4.34 across Nevada and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.45 of those hours.
31.4% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Nevada average 45.1%).
CMS links it to Life Care Centers of America, an affiliated group of 194 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 36 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure 1) blood glucose (BG) levels were obtained on admission, 2) discharge summary recommendations for diabetes management were discussed or clarified with the attending physician, and orders for BG monitoring and Insulin sliding scale were obtained for a resident with type one diabetes mellitus, 3) BG levels were obtained during a change of condition, and 4) the facility had a clear diabetes management process or protocol for 1 of 40 sampled residents (Resident 161). The deficient practice potentially resulted in diabetic-related complication requiring hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure the attending physician conducted an independent, thorough review of a hospital discharge summary for a resident admitted with Type one diabetes mellitus for 1 of 40 sampled residents (Resident 161). The deficient practice resulted in the resident experiencing diabetic-related complications which required rehospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure resident rooms and bathrooms were in good repair for 9 of 72 resident rooms. The deficient practice had the potential to negatively impact on the residents' quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure care and management of a resident's intravenous line (IV) were included in the resident's baseline care plan for 1 of 40 sampled residents (Resident 171). The deficient practice placed the resident at risk for infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure physician orders were followed for an indwelling catheter for 1 of 40 sampled residents (Resident 2). The deficient practice placed the resident at risk for a urinary tract infection (UTI).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure care and management orders were entered for a resident who was admitted with an intravenous (IV) line for 1 of 40 sampled residents (Resident 171). The deficient practice placed the resident at risk for infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure an annual performance evaluation for 2 of 2 Certified Nurse Aides (CNA1 and CNA2) was completed at least once every 12 months. The deficient practice had the potential to limit the facility's ability to evaluate competency, identify training needs and allow performance deficits to go unaddressed.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure 1) indication for use for psychotropic medications were appropriate 2) side effect and behavior monitoring was in place 3) an informed consent was obtained for psychotropic medication use and 4) an Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Assessment was conducted for 1 of 40 sampled residents (R174). The deficient practiced placed the resident at risk of unnecessary medication use and potential adverse side effects.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and document review the facility failed to ensure the kitchen was maintained in a sanitary manner. The deficient practice placed residents at risk for foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure orders for physical therapy (PT) and occupational therapy (OT) were followed for 3 of 40 sampled residents(Residents 63, 73 and 169) and speech therapy (ST) for 1 of 40 sampled residents (Resident 48). The deficient practice placed the residents at a potential for slower progression towards goals.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure a discharge was completed including a home health referral was accepted by an agency prior to discharging for a resident requiring wound dressing changes for one of five sampled residents (Resident 2). The deficient practice placed the resident at risk for wound complications including infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure scheduled showers were provided for residents who were assessed to require assistance with showers for 3 of 5 sampled residents (Residents 3, 4 and 5). The deficient practice had the potential to negatively impact on the residents' quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure a physician order for computed tomography (CT) scan was carried out for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident 1). The deficient practice had the potential to delay or negatively impact the resident's plan of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to properly date resident drink containers in 2 of 2 nourishment refrigerators and employee food stored in the resident freezer. This deficient practice has the potential to lead bacterial growth and foodborne illnesses.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to maintain dignity for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident 362). The deficient practice had the potential to result in unnecessary disclosure of resident care needs and failed to promote respect and individuality.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure an incident of resident elopement was reported to the State Agency (SA) within the required timeframe for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident 84). The deficient practice had the potential to place residents at risk for further incidents and to not be adequately protected.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure a resident baseline care plan fit the needs for 1 of 24 residents. The deficient practice had the potential to significantly impact the resident's well-being and safety.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure incontinent care was provided to a dependent resident who was soiled, wet, and had requested assistance for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident 111). This deficient practice had the potential to result in skin breakdown, infections, discomfort, and a diminished quality of life. Resident 111 (R111) R111 was admitted on [DATE] and discharged on 04/02/2025 with diagnoses including multiple sclerosis, difficulty walking, and need for assistance with personal care. On 06/04/2025 the State Agency received a report detailing concerns related to R111. The report alleged R111 had been left in a soiled incontinence brief for several hours on 03/17/2025 while at the facility. An admission minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented R111: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to obtain physician orders for 2 of 24 sampled residents (Resident 84 and Resident 51) and schedule a follow-up appointment as recommended for 1of 24 sampled residents (Resident 51). The deficient practice had the potential for inappropriate discharge and to delay treatment and healing of a fracture.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure weekly weights were obtained in accordance with physician's order for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident 3). The failure potentially delayed identification of a significant weight change, nutritional re-assessment by a Registered Dietitian (RD) and appropriate interventions by the inter-disciplinary team (IDT).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to: 1) follow a physician order for intravenous (IV) site care and 2) obtain a physician order for the use or removal of IV access for 2 of 24 sampled residents (Residents 9 and 261). This deficient practice had the potential to result in infection, phlebitis, infiltration, and compromised venous access.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and document review the facility failed to ensure it was free of a medication error rate of less than five percent (%) for four residents (Resident 88, 29, 361, and 94). The deficient practice posed a potential risk of injury or harm to the resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to dispose expired medications. This deficient practice has the potential to cause adverse reactions or worsened health conditions to residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure medications were secured in 1 of 2 central supply rooms. The deficient practice had the potential risk of unauthorized access to medications, theft, or misuse of medication within the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to complete a nutritional assessment including food preferences within 72-hours of admission per facility policy for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident 2). The failure to honor resident food preferences could potentially cause residents to lose interest in eating their meals.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure a safe discharge was planned and occurred for 2 of 2 unsampled residents (R214 and R219). This deficient practice had the potential for residents to be placed in an improper home setting and not receive the required care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record and document review, the facility failed to ensure comprehensive care plans were implemented for the management of falls for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident 50). The deficient practice had the potential for staff not to provide personalized care for the resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure scheduled showers were provided to dependent residents for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident 246) and 2 unsampled residents (Residents 215 and 213). This deficient practice could potentially compromise resident hygiene and comfort, and increase the risk of skin breakdown and infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with a urinary catheter had appropriate diagnosis and a bladder training program was implemented for 1 of 24 sampled residents. The deficient practice had the potential for increased risk of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure the ordered fluid restriction was followed for a dialysis dependent resident and the actual fluid intake or consumption was monitored for 1 of 24 sampled residents (Resident 14). The deficient practice could have the potential to result in adverse health outcomes, including fluid overload, increased blood pressure, and complications related to the resident's dialysis treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to account for narcotics (opioid) signed out on the controlled drug record for one unsampled resident (R213). The deficient practice had the potential to delay a resident's pain management and increase the risk for physical and psychosocial harm.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure a physician order to discontinue medication was completed for 1 of 24 sampled residents. The deficient practice had the potential for adverse effects on the resident and unnecessary medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure it was free of a medication error rate of five percent (%) or greater for one unsampled resident (Resident 37). Failure to administer medications as prescribed could have delayed the therapeutic treatment for the resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure stored foods were labeled and dated and food items were stored properly. This deficient practice posed a potential risk to safety and health standards which could lead to contamination, inadequate storage, and place residents at risk of foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure fall prevention interventions were included in the baseline care plan of a resident who was at risk for falls for 1 of 10 sampled residents (Resident 7). The deficient practice potentially contributed to an actual fall.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to 1) document evidence at discharge of medication education, instructions, and reconciliation, 2) follow-up for durable medical equipment (DME) recommendation, and 3) lacked a physician's discharge summary for 1 of 10 sampled residents (Resident 9). The deficient practice potentially contributed to the resident's lack of knowledge regarding their medication and delayed the resident from obtaining the recommended medical equipment.
69 fire safety citations on file: 26 on May 27, 2026, 22 on June 13, 2025, 19 on August 9, 2024, 2 on February 23, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| May 27, 2026 | Fine | $27,378 |
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 | Nevada | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.84 | 4.34 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.45 | 1.12 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.45 | 3.86 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.09 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.29 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 31.4% | 45.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 52.9% | 43.4% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.84 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 3.99 on weekdays and 3.45 on weekends, 14% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.87 in April to June 2025 to 3.84 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 | 3.84 | 0.45 | 3.99 | 3.45 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 115 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.87 | 0.49 | 4.02 | 3.47 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 112 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.95 | 0.57 | 4.10 | 3.57 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 109 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.87 | 0.50 | 4.10 | 3.30 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 112 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Nevada, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.88 | 0.85 | 4.05 | 3.46 | 2.7% | 0.1% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nevada, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $21.87 | $18.80 to $23.07 | 8,100 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $36.62 | $31.70 to $38.26 | 3,350 |
| Registered nurses | $49.84 | $41.76 to $57.82 | 27,070 |
| 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 | Nevada | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.0 | 12.6 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.6 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.9 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.1 | 2.0 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 1.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.5 | 13.5 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.1 | 5.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.9 | 17.1 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 19.1 | 23.2 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 11.6 | 9.6 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Life Care Center of South Las Vegas's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (47.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
47.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Nevada: 9 better, 7 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. 71 eligible stays.
12.5% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Nevada: 0 better, 5 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. 91 eligible stays.
9.4% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Nevada: 1 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. 56 eligible stays.
63.6% this home
Median of homes: Nevada60.3% · 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. 55 residents counted.
1.5% this home
Median of homes: Nevada0.4% · 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. 132 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Nevada1.6% · 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. 132 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: Nevada91.8% · 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. 16 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: SOUTH LAS VEGAS MEDICAL INVESTORS LLC. CMS links this home to Life Care Centers of America, a group of 194 nursing homes averaging 3.4 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Developers Investment Company Inc | Direct ownership interest | Organization | 05/01/2016 | |
| Butner, Nancy | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 09/16/2018 | |
| Minor, Jeffrey | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 07/18/2022 | |
| Smith, Nicole | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 10/01/2024 | |
| Cross, Cindy | Corporate officer | Individual | 12/01/1997 | |
| Lay, Lisa | Corporate officer | Individual | 02/09/2018 | |
| Swanker, Richard | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/01/2011 | |
| Thurmond, Joan | Corporate officer | Individual | 09/22/2000 | |
| Developers Investment Company Inc | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 05/01/2016 | |
| Life Care Centers of America, Inc. | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 12/01/1997 | |
| South Las Vegas Medical Investors LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 12/01/1997 | |
| Butner, Nancy | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/16/2018 | |
| Elmesallati, Husameddin | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2026 | |
| Fletcher, Todd | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/13/2024 | |
| Minor, Jeffrey | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/18/2022 | |
| Preston, Aubrey | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/13/2024 | |
| Smith, Nicole | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 10/01/2024 | |
| Ziegler, James | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/13/2024 | |
| Life Care Centers of America, Inc. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 02/25/2025 | |
| South Las Vegas Medical Investors LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/21/2026 | |
| South Las Vegas Real Estate Investors, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/21/2026 | |
| Elmesallati, Husameddin | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/15/2026 | |
| Minor, Jeffrey | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/25/2025 | |
| Preston, Forrest | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/21/2026 |
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.