3855 South 700 East, Millcreek, UT 84106 · Salt Lake County · (801) 268-4766
184 certified beds, about 113 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1984
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 465094 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 28, 2025, inspectors cited 14 health deficiencies (the Utah average is 8.8, the national average 9.2).
Of 49 health citations since December 2021, 3 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 3 fines totaling $59,188 in the last three years; the largest was $36,660, and the latest is dated March 31, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.82 hours per resident per day, against 4.09 across Utah and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 1.02 of those hours.
42.2% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Utah average 50.7%).
CMS links it to Monument Health Group, an affiliated group of 11 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 49 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, observation, and record review, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure that a resident's environment remained free of accident hazards for one of one resident reviewed for accidents (Resident #11). Specifically, the facility failed to ensure a mechanical lift sling was in safe, functional condition, resulting in a strap breakage during a transfer. This failure caused Resident #11 to fall, resulting in a 1cm scalp laceration and severe pain (9/10). The facility's noncompliance was determined to be Past Noncompliance. The facility developed and implemented a corrective action plan on August 26, 2025, which included staff retraining on mechanical lift competencies, disposal and replacement of all slings, and verification of interventions prior to the start of the survey on March 30, 2026. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that each resident was provided the necessary care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being in accordance with professional standards of practice. Specifically, for 1 of 12 residents reviewed for medication administration, one nurse failed to follow professional standards for medication identification, resulting in the administration of two medications (Lorazepam and Carvedilol) to the wrong resident (Resident #1). The facility's noncompliance was determined to be Past Noncompliance. The facility developed and implemented a corrective action plan on August 13, 2025, which included staff education on the five rights of medication administration, skills competency check-offs, and internal monitoring to ensure no further errors occurred. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to protect the residents' rights to be free from verbal and sexual abuse by a resident. Residents #33, #71, and #351 all reported they felt threatened and/or uncomfortable around Resident #346, a resident who was know to display sexually inappropriate behaviors. The facility further failed to protect the residents' rights to be free from physical abuse by staff. On 02/14/2025, Registered Nurse (RN) #9 willfully and intentionally yanked a walker from Resident #402, which caused the resident to fall to the floor. Resident #402 sustained a 2-inch goose egg to the forehead and bruised knees. The facility substantiated that abuse occurred and terminated the employment of RN #9. These deficient practices affected 4 (Residents #33, #71, #351, and #402) of 20 sampled residents. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure residents and/or their representatives were afforded 30 days to revoke their signed binding arbitration agreement for 3 (Residents #62, #78, and #82) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for arbitration. The facility Binding Arbitration Agreement with a copyright date of 2024, indicated 9. Revocation: This Agreement may be revoked by the Resident by written notice mailed to the Administrator of the Facility, using certified mail with return receipt requested, within ten (10) days after the date hereof, and if not revoked shall govern all aspects of the relationship between Facility and Resident upon and after the date of the Agreement.1. An admission Record indicated the facility admitted Resident #62 on 05/19/2023. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure residents and/or their representatives were afforded an arbitration venue convenient to both parties for 3 (Residents #62, #78, and #82) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for arbitration. The facility Binding Arbitration Agreement with a copyright date of 2024, revealed no evidence to indicate for the selection of an arbitration venue that was convenience to both parties.1. An admission Record indicated the facility admitted Resident #62 on 05/19/2023. Resident #62's undated Binding Arbitration Agreement signed by the resident and the printed name of the Dietary Manager revealed no evidence to indicate for the selection of an arbitration venue that was convenience to both parties.2. An admission Record indicated the facility admitted Resident #78 on 06/22/2025. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure quarterly quality assurance performance improvement (QAPI) meetings were conducted and the facility maintained a list of staff who were present/participated in the quarterly QAPI meetings. These deficient practices had the potential to affect all residents who resided in the facility. A facility policy titled, QAPI Program, with a copyright date of 2024, indicated, [Facility name] QAPI team shall meet at least quarterly to review all Quality Assurance Performance Improvement items. During an interview on 06/28/2025 at 11:50 AM, the Administrator the facility was recently purchased from another company, so the current administrative team had only had one QAPI meeting, which was in 03/2025. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff were fit tested annually. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents who resided in the facility. The facility failed to ensure staff performed proper hand hygiene during the provision of dialysis for 1 (Resident #82) of 1 sampled resident reviewed for dialysis. The facility further failed to ensure staff cleaned and stored respiratory equipment for 1 (Resident #40) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for respiratory care.1. During an interview on 06/26/2025 at 3:20 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated the facility followed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines for fit tests. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to timely report to the state survey agency an allegation of abuse and further failed to submit their completed investigation to the state survey agency within five working days for 1 (Resident #402) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for abuse. The facility further failed to report allegations of abuse to the state survey agency that involved 3 (Residents #33, #71, and #351) of 20 sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to thorough investigate allegations of abuse that involved 4 (Residents #33, #71, #351, and #402) of 20 sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure 1 (Resident #58) of 5 residents observed for medication administration were assessed to be able to safely self-administer their medication before a nurse left medication at the resident's bedside. A facility policy titled, Medications: Administering Medications, dated 02/01/2024, indicated, 27. Residents may self-administer their own medications only if the attending physician, in conjunction with the interdisciplinary care planning team, has determined that they have the decision-making capacity to do so safely. An admission Record indicated the facility admitted Resident #58 on 05/21/2025. According to the admission Record, the resident had a medical history that included diagnoses of spinal stenosis of the lumbar region, low back pain, and age-related osteoporosis. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for the care and treatment of a resident with a left hand contracture for 1 (Resident #47) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for position, mobility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide personal hygiene care to 1 (Resident #399) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide 1 (Resident #399) of 1 sampled resident reviewed for activities with an activity calendar and further failed to ensure staff provided the resident with activities of their choice.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident received treatment and services to increase a range of motion (ROM) in their left hand contracture for 1 (Resident #47) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for position, mobility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the licensed nursing staff documented the refusal of medication for 1 (Resident #97) of 5 residents observed for medication administration. The facility further failed to ensure the licensed nursing staff documented why medication was not administered to 1 (Resident #82) of 1 sampled resident reviewed for insulin.1. A facility policy titled, Medication: Documentation of Medication Administration, dated 02/01/2024, indicated, A medication administration record [MAR] is used to document all medications administered. The policy specified, 2. Administration of medication is documented immediately after it is given. 3. Documentation of medication administration includes, as a minimum: a. the resident's name; b. name and strength of the drug; c. dosage; d. route of administration; e. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's room provided enough space so that they could access their bathroom in a motorized wheelchair for 1 (Resident #15) of 5 sampled residents reviewed for the environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that 1 out of 9 sampled residents received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents. Specifically, a resident who was assessed as being a high risk for falls did not have interventions in place to prevent falls. The resident had a fall and sustained a maxillary fracture. Resident identifier: 3.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, facility document review, and review of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2022 Food Code, the facility failed to ensure dietary staff routinely monitored food temperatures on the meal service line. Specifically, the facility failed to take the temperatures of all food and drink items that required temperature control for safety to limit microorganism growth and failed to have temperature logs available on several days. This had the potential to affect 98 of 98 residents who received meals from the dietary department.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, interviews, and review of the facility policy, it was determined that the facility failed to ensure 3 (Residents #33, #39, and #262) of 4 residents who were self-administering medications, were assessed to determine whether it was safe to self-administer the medications and to keep the medications at the bedside.
Inspectors wrote4. Review of a facility policy titled, Quality of Care: Accident Hazards/Supervision/Devices, revised on 05/04/2023, revealed, The resident's care plan will reflect the extent of supervision, if any, is needed during smoking. A review of an admission Record indicated the facility admitted Resident #96 on 06/01/2023 with a diagnosis that included hypertension. The admission Record included a diagnosis of acute respiratory failure with hypoxia with an onset date of 08/25/2023. Review of an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/06/2023 revealed Resident #96 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 9, which indicated moderately impaired cognition. The resident required staff supervision for all activities of daily living. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record review, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to provide services to residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living (ADL) necessary to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for 3 (Residents #44, #51, and #261) of 4 sampled residents reviewed for ADL care. Specifically, Resident #44 and Resident #261 had long and dirty fingernails, Resident #51 and Resident #261 had facial hair that needed to be trimmed, and Resident #261 had debris around their mouth.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to: 1) ensure cigarettes and lighters were stored safely at the nursing station for 3 (Residents #38, #44, and #96) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for smoking; 2) complete a smoking assessment for 1 (Resident #96) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for smoking in accordance with the facility's policy; and 3) ensure 2 (Resident #61 and Resident #47) of 5 sampled residents reviewed for accident hazards were safely transferred and/or transported. Staff failed to utilize a gait belt during a stand and pivot transfer for Resident #61 and failed to utilize footrests while transporting Resident #61 and Resident #47 in their wheelchairs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide appropriate respiratory care for 4 (Residents #33, #39, #97, and #262) of 6 sampled residents reviewed for respiratory care. Specifically, the facility failed to: 1) ensure there was a physician order for the use of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP, a machine that uses mild air pressure to keep breathing airways opened during sleep) for Resident #97 and Resident #262; 2) store Resident #33's nebulizer mask when not in use; and 3) store the CPAP equipment for Resident #39 when not use.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review, and facility document and policy review, the facility failed to submit a final investigative report within the required five working days to the state survey agency for 1 (Resident #13) of 3 sampled residents reviewed for abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interviews, document review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to complete an admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for 1 (Resident #262) of 5 sampled residents reviewed for resident assessments.
Inspectors wrote3. A review of an admission Record indicated the facility admitted Resident #44 on 07/28/2017 with diagnoses that included encephalopathy and generalized muscle weakness. A review of Resident #44's quarterly MDS, with an ARD of 07/02/2023, revealed the date the assessment was completed was 08/18/2023, which was beyond the required 14 days after the ARD. During an interview on 08/30/2023 at 4:10 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated she expected MDSs to be completed timely per the RAI manual. During an interview on 08/30/2023 at 4:36 PM, the MDS Coordinator stated she had worked for the facility for about three weeks. She stated the facility had not had an MDS Coordinator temporarily, so some MDSs were not completed timely. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the Minimum Data Set (MDS) was coded accurately for 2 (Residents #58 and #76) of 27 sampled residents reviewed. Specifically, Resident #58's 06/06/2023 quarterly MDS assessment did not address the resident's cognitive status, and Resident #76's 04/04/2023 quarterly MDS assessment did not address the resident's fall with major injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure procedures for receiving medication for residents was accurate and safe for 1 (Resident #96) of 7 residents reviewed for medications. Specifically, the facility placed medication found in Resident #96's backpack labeled as Methadone in the medication cart to be administered to the resident, even though the resident stated the medication in the bottles was ibuprofen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review it was determined the facility did not store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. Specifically, foods in the resident communal refrigerators were not labeled, dated or disposed of when past expiration dates, also at the time of observation the facility dish machine was used without insurance of adequate sanitizer levels.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review it was determined the facility did not ensure residents had a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, while exercising reasonable care for the protection of the resident's property from loss or theft, and providing housekeeping and maintenance services necessary to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable interior. Specifically, resident interviews and observations were performed regarding uncleanly conditions in a resident communal shower room, and for 2 of 49 sample residents the facility did not ensure residents had reasonable protection of property from loss or theft. Resident identifiers: 11, 45, 60, 74.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review it was determined, for 4 of 49 sample residents, that the facility did not develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that included measurable objectives and timeframe's to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment. Specifically, one resident with difficulty communicating was not provided a communication book for staff to communicate with her, pressure ulcers were not noted, and pain was not addressed. Resident identifiers: 18, 34, 45 and 70.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined for 2 of 49 sampled residents that the facility did not ensure that residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene. Specifically, a dependent resident was observed to go nearly 2 hours without being provided incontinence care or responded to by staff, and another dependent resident's scheduled bathing did not occur multiple times. Resident identifier: 8 and 67.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, it was determined the facility did not ensure that each resident received adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent accidents for 2 of 49 sample residents. Specifically, a resident had multiple falls without interventions, and one resident was run into by a meal cart. Resident identifiers: 18 and 60.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and observation, the facility did not have sufficient nursing staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, as determined by resident assessments and individual plans of care and considering the number, acuity and diagnoses of the facility's resident population in accordance with the facility assessment, for 4 of 49 sample residents. Specifically, residents were required to wait for care in excess of an hour, and staffing levels prohibited proper infection control practices. Disinfectant was also not being provided to the laundry. Resident identifiers: 8, 60, 67, and 78.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review it was determined the facility did not ensure each resident received and the facility provided food prepared by methods that conserved nutritive value, flavor, and appearance, as well as, food and drink that was palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature for 6 of 49 sample residents. Specifically, multiple residents complained of food that was not palatable or of appropriate temperature, resident council minutes revealed complaints of food, and the test tray was not attractive or palatable. Resident identifiers: 5, 10, 45, 54, 60, 97. 1. Resident 10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with medical diagnoses which included, but not limited to, paraplegia, hemiplegia, morbid obesity, dysphagia, mood disorder, hypertension, cognitive communication deficit, and hyper glycemia. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, it was determined that the facility did not establish and maintain an IPCP designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Specifically, staff were observed to transport resident beverages uncovered through nursing units during meal delivery, PPE was not maintained for an outbreak, face masks were not disinfected adequately, sputum was left on the sidewalk, and cleaning rooms after residents were diagnosed with COVID-19 did not occur timely. Findings Include: 1. On 12/1/21 at 8:21 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) 9 and Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) 13 were observed in room with droplet and contact precautions. RN 9 and CNA 13 were observed handling bedding and the resident's belongings, and performing resident cares without wearing gowns. 2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility did not conduct COVID-19 testing based on the criteria for conducting testing of asymptomatic individuals such as the positivity rate of COVID-19 in a county. Specifically, unvaccinated staff were not tested twice a week when the county positivity rate was High >10%) and during the facility's outbreak. This occurred for 4 out of 5 sampled staff members.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility did not provide reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences. Specifically, a resident was not given a bed with a frame that would allow the resident to elevate her legs and feet. This occurred for 1 of 49 sample residents. Resident Identifier: 83.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, it was determined the facility did not ensure a resident had the right to request, refuse, or discontinue treatment and to formulate an advance directive. Specifically, for 1 of 49 sample residents, the facility did not provide the resident with the right to have her advanced directives honored due to lack of lack of accessible Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) for nursing staff review. Resident identifier: 60.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview it was determined, for 6 of 49 sample residents, that the facility did not ensure the prompt resolution of grievances. Additionally, the grievances completed by the resident council were not resolved. Resident identifiers: 3, 28, 45, 54, 60, and 75.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined that the facility did not provide, for 1 of 49 sample residents, with appropriate treatment and services to maintain or improve his or her ability to carry out the activities of daily living. Specifically, one resident was provided with assistance as needed for mobility and communication. Resident identifiers: 18.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review it was determined, for 1 of 49 sampled residents, that the facility did not ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choice. Specifically, one resident's physician order for physical, speech and occupational therapies were not implemented. Resident identifiers: 70. Resident 70 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] then readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included, encephalopathy, dysarthria, anarthria, cognitive communication deficit, muscle weakness, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, type II diabetes mellitus, sepsis, bacterial infection, paraplegia, major depressive disorder, spina bifida, and morbid obesity. On 12/1/21 resident 70's medical record was reviewed. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, it was determined the facility did not ensure that residents with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing for 1 of 49 sample residents. Specifically, one resident admitted with two pressure ulcers received additional pressure ulcers which progressed to stage IV with osteomyelitis (bone infection) that required intravenous antibiotics. Resident identifier: 97.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review it was determined that the facility did not maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrated that this was not possible and did not offer a therapeutic diet when there was a nutritional problem and the health care provider ordered a therapeutic diet. Specifically, Resident 67 did not have nutritional orders implemented or followed. Resident identifier: 67. Resident 67 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: paraplegia, sacral pressure ulcers, acute respiratory failure with hypercapnia, neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder, and type II diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review it was determined that for 1 of 49 sample residents that the facility did not ensure that pain management was provided to a resident consistent with professional standards, and the resident's goals and preferences. Specifically, a resident reported he had asked to have his pain medication administration times spread out throughout the day to alleviate his pain and this was not done. Resident identifier 45.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, it was determined the facility did not ensure that each drug regimen was free from unnecessary drugs for 1 of 49 sample residents. An unnecessary drug is any drug when used in excessive dose; excessive duration; without adequate monitoring; without adequate indications for its use; or in the presence of adverse consequences which indicate the dose should be reduced or discontinued. Specifically, a resident's insulin was not administered according to physician's orders. Resident identifiers: 70.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility did not store drugs and biologicals under proper temperature. Specifically two of four medication room refrigerators' temperatures were out the safe refrigerated storage temperature range of 36 degrees to 46 degrees Fahrenheit.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review it was determined the facility did not ensure each resident received drinks, including water and other liquids, consistent with the residents' needs and preferences to maintain resident hydration. Specifically, for 1 of the sample 49 residents, a resident with a physician order for thickened liquids was provided with thin, regular consistency water at meal time and during the day. Resident identifier: 22.
Inspectors wrote2. Resident 45 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis which included, emphysema, generalized muscle weakness, difficulty walking, cognitive communication deficit, fracture of lumbar vertebra, lumbago with sciatica, major depressive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, chronic pain, type II diabetes mellitus, and atherosclerotic hear disease. On 11/29/21 at 1143 AM, an interview was conducted with resident 45. Resident 45 stated he had tried to get his pain medication times spread out because they do not work to control his pain all day. Resident 45 stated he went to the pain clinic last week and the pain clinic recommended resident 45's pain medications be changed but nothing has happened. Resident 45 medical record was reviewed on 12/1/21. Resident 45 did not have scanned Pain Clinic paperwork from his appointment. [...]
1 fire safety citation on file: 1 on December 6, 2021.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| March 31, 2026 | Fine | $14,380 |
| June 28, 2025 | Fine | $36,660 |
| January 31, 2024 | Fine | $8,148 |
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 | Utah | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.82 | 4.09 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 1.02 | 1.25 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.37 | 3.58 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.26 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.54 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 42.2% | 50.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 53.8% | 40.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.41 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 4.01 on weekdays and 3.37 on weekends, 16% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 1.8% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.93 in April to June 2025 to 3.82 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 | 3.82 | 1.02 | 4.01 | 3.37 | 1.8% | 0 of 90 | 113 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.95 | 1.14 | 4.14 | 3.46 | 4.0% | 0 of 92 | 102 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.90 | 1.01 | 4.07 | 3.45 | 6.2% | 0 of 92 | 95 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.93 | 1.05 | 4.12 | 3.46 | 3.7% | 0 of 91 | 94 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Utah, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.91 | 1.11 | 4.10 | 3.44 | 2.8% | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Utah, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $19.15 | $17.81 to $21.32 | 12,260 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $30.40 | $25.71 to $35.86 | 1,680 |
| Registered nurses | $40.67 | $38.49 to $50.54 | 27,420 |
| 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 | Utah | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 10.5 | 11.3 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.0 | 1.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.6 | 2.5 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 0.9 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 14.3 | 15.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.6 | 3.9 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.8 | 14.2 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 10.1 | 16.6 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 12.0 | 11.6 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.9 | 1.4 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Monument Healthcare Murray Creek's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (60.4% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
60.4% this home
Better than the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Utah: 40 better, 0 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. 88 eligible stays.
8.4% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Utah: 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. 112 eligible stays.
5.7% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Utah: 2 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. 35 eligible stays.
67.7% this home
Median of homes: Utah63.5% · 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. 31 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Utah0.0% · 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. 38 residents counted.
3.3% this home
Median of homes: Utah1.3% · 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. 38 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: Utah100.0% · 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. 9 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: GUNNISON VALLEY HOSPITAL. CMS links this home to Monument Health Group, a group of 11 nursing homes averaging 2.6 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Murray, Brian | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2018 | |
| Health Group Management LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 02/07/2025 | |
| Monument Health Group LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 02/07/2025 | |
| Clawson, Travis | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Espinosa, Stephanie | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Fragoso, Lindsay | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Gangotena-Bernard, Fatima | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Marriott, Stephen | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Robertson, Brett | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Samuelian, Spencer | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Seastrand, Jason | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Thap, Renuka | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| West, Christian | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Wilson, Brent | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Health Group Management LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/28/2025 | |
| Monument Health Group LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/26/2025 | |
| Monument Health Properties LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 02/07/2025 | |
| Monument Real Estate Murray Creek LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 02/07/2025 | |
| Clawson, Travis | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Espinosa, Stephanie | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Fragoso, Lindsay | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Gangotena-Bernard, Fatima | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Marriott, Stephen | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Robertson, Brett | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Samuelian, Spencer | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Seastrand, Jason | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Thap, Renuka | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| West, Christian | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/07/2025 | |
| Wilson, Brent | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/07/2025 |
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 Utah. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.