10550 Park Run Drive, Las Vegas, NV 89144 · Clark County · (702) 515-6200
190 certified beds, about 169 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 2005
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 295083 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on March 27, 2026, inspectors cited 15 health deficiencies (the Nevada average is 9.7, the national average 9.2).
None of its 40 health citations since November 2023 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.62 hours per resident per day, against 4.34 across Nevada and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.84 of those hours.
41.6% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Nevada average 45.1%).
CMS links it to Genesis Healthcare, an affiliated group of 184 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 40 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and document review the facility failed to ensure 1) the kitchen was maintained in a sanitary manner, 2) there was no backed up water on the kitchen floor due to a broken drain line in the dishwasher area and a broken sewer line in the beverage area, 3) a nourishment refrigerator did not contain opened food items which were undated, and snacks were stored in proper temperature. 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, a baseline care plan was developed for a resident admitted with an indwelling catheter for 1 of 38 sampled residents (Resident 199). The deficient practice placed residents at risk for inadequate Foley catheter care and potential for infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure care plan interventions for an indwelling catheter were implemented for 1 of 38 sampled residents (Resident 199). The deficient practice placed Resident 199 at risk for inadequate Foley catheter care and potential for infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan for skin integrity was reviewed and updated when a resident with existing pressure ulcers and assessed to be at high risk for developing and worsening pressure ulcers returned from hospitalization to treat an infected wound for 1 of 38 sampled residents (Resident 15). The deficient practice placed the resident at risk for recurrent wound infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure a scheduled shower was provided for a resident who required assistance with bathing for 1 of 38 sampled residents (Resident 231). The deficient practice placed the residents at risk for infection and worsening of skin breakdown.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure 1) appropriate care and services were provided to prevent recurrent gastrostomy tube dislodgement for 1 of 38 sampled residents (Resident 239) and, care and management orders were obtained for a compression device for 1 of 38 sampled residents (Resident 231). The deficient practice placed Resident 239 at risk for repeat G-tube dislodgement and Resident 231 at risk for recurrent cellulitis.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive skin assessment was performed by the wound care team upon readmission of a resident who had existing pressure ulcers and the resident was assessed as a high risk for developing and worsening pressure ulcers for 1 of 38 sampled residents (Resident 15). The deficient practice placed the residents at risk for recurrent wound infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure proper foot hygiene and podiatry care for 1 of 38 sampled residents (Resident R86). This deficient practice placed the resident at risk for pain and foot infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with non weight bearing status was safely transferred from bed to wheelchair using a mechanical lift harness in good repair for 1 of 38 sampled residents (Resident #132). This deficient practice placed the resident at risk for an accident, fall, and injury during transfer.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review the facility failed to ensure care and management orders for indwelling Foley catheter were obtained and implemented for 2 of 38 sampled residents (Resident 226 and Resident 199). The deficient practice had the potential to place residents at risk for infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than 5%, as required. This deficient practice placed residents at risk for adverse drug outcomes, decreased therapeutic effectiveness, and compromised safety.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review the facility failed to ensure medications were secured for 1 of 38 sampled residents (Resident 175) expired medication was disposed of. The deficient practice had the potential for the facility staff to administer expired and contaminated medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure there was sufficient number of kitchen personnel to provide the residents with meals delivered timely, and at proper temperature. The deficient practice placed residents at risk for negatively impacting quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure food was not served late and at appropriate temperatures per facility policy. The deficient practice had the potential to negatively impact residents' quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure expired food items were discarded from 2 of 38 sampled resident refrigerators (Resident 151 and Resident 175). The deficient practice had the potential for expired foods to be consumed, which could lead to foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to appropriately assess residents who smoked upon admission/readmission, secure smoking materials, including lighters, and establish a policy outlining guidelines on how to address smoking among residents in a non-smoking facility, and ensure safety measures were implemented for 3 of 13 sampled residents (Residents 66, 104, and 65). This deficient practice had the potential to place residents at risk of self-inflicted burns, fire hazards, or other safety concerns.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure snacks were available to residents outside of scheduled mealtimes. The failed practice had the potential to cause residents to remain hungry in between meals and the resident's nutritional needs not met.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure the accuracy of assessment reflected the resident's status regarding the harness and straps being used for safety rather than as a restraint for 1 of 31 sampled residents. This deficient practice had the potential to result in the improper use of restraints, restricted mobility, and diminished quality of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans to reflect new interventions, specifically a smoking care plan for 1 of 13 sampled residents (Resident 65). The deficient practice had the potential to deprive residents of necessary interventions to maintain overall well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure showers or a bath, were provided as scheduled for 1 of 4 unsampled residents (Resident 471). The deficient practice had the potential to increase skin breakdown, infections, odor and bacteria buildup.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's prescribed Foley size order was followed or clarified and monitored for signs and symptoms of infection, and the physician was notified promptly for the presence of sediments and odorous urine for 1 of 31 sampled residents (Resident 16). This deficient practice had the potential to result in complications such as urinary tract infections (UTIs), discomfort, catheter-associated infections, and other related health risks.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to ensure: 1) The PT-INR (prothrombin time-international normalized ratio, a blood test measuring how long it took for blood to clot) was completed as ordered, and the level was monitored, documented in the Medication Administration Record and reported to the physician for 1 of 31 sampled residents (Resident 12). This deficient practice had the potential to result in adverse health outcomes, including an increased risk of bleeding or clotting complications and potential harm due to inadequate monitoring of anticoagulation therapy, and 2) A pain medication was administered despite a documented reported pain level of zero for one of 13 sampled residents (Resident 13). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medicated wound care barrier cream were secured for 1 of 16 sampled residents (Resident 2). The deficient practice had the potential risk of unauthorized access to medication, or misuse of medication within the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure food items stored inside the walk-in cooler and walk-in freezer were labeled, dated, and not expired; the janitor closet located inside the kitchen was maintained in a sanitary condition; bottles of hand soap were not stored over the disposable ware and food item on a shelving unit in the Dry Storage Room; a meal tray was served to the correct resident for 1 of 34 sampled residents (Resident 113); and temperature logs were monitored and maintained for 3 of 4 nourishment refrigerators (First floor East Wing, 300 Hall, and 200 Hall). The deficient practices had the potential to place the residents at risk for a foodborne illness and had a resident served with incorrect diet.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure a final report which included documentation of investigation findings and any corrective actions taken by the facility regarding an allegation of verbal abuse was submitted to the state agency for 1 of 34 sampled residents (Resident 54). The deficient practice which included failure to notify the resident of concern of the outcome of the investigation, had the potential to discourage residents from reporting incidences of potential abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure there was a process in place to identify and refer residents with newly identified psychiatric diagnoses for pre-admission screening and resident review (PASARR) level two for 2 of 34 sampled residents (Residents 91 and 69). The deficient practice had the potential to deprive residents of necessary behavioral health services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record and document review, the facility failed to ensure comprehensive care plans were developed for: 1) monitoring and managing edema for a resident (Resident 74) and 2) a dialysis access catheter currently in use was care planned (Resident 128). The deficient practice had a potential for staff not to provide personalized care for residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure 1) prescribed orders to monitor and manage edema (swelling caused by too much fluid trapped in the body's tissues) were completed as prescribed for 1 of 34 sampled residents (Resident 74), 2) physician's order for fluid restriction was followed and discussed with the resident for 1 of 34 sampled residents (Resident 12). The deficient practices placed the residents at risk for fluid overload, missed edema management and non-compliance with physician orders.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure wound care treatments were provided per the physician's orders for one unsampled resident (Resident 177). The deficient practice had the potential for the worsening of the resident's skin condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure the restorative nursing services were provided per the therapy recommendation for 1 of 34 sampled residents (Resident 104). The deficient practice had the potential for the resident's further decline in physical functioning/mobility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure the gastrostomy tube (G-tube) feeding and water flush bag were labeled with the name of the resident, room number, infusion rate, and date and time the feeding and water flushes started for one unsampled resident (Resident 129). The deficient practice had the potential for the resident receiving expired or incorrect G-tube feeding, and inaccurate rate of feeding and water flushes.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure a peripheral intravenous (IV) line dressing was dated for 1 of 34 residents (Resident 21), and a midline (an 8 - 12 centimeter length IV catheter inserted in the upper arm with the tip located just below the axilla) catheter dressing was changed for 1 of 34 residents (Resident 133). The deficient practice poses an IV access site infection risk for the resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure staff received training and obtained a physician's order for a continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP - a machine that uses mild air pressure to keep the airway open during sleep) device utilized within the facility for 1 of 34 sampled residents (Resident 288), The deficient practice had a potential for staff not to be aware and properly care for a resident with a specialized medical device.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure 1) dialysis access catheter was assessed and monitored and, 2) refusal of dialysis treatment interventions were documented for 1 of 34 residents (Resident 128). The deficient practice had a potential for the dialysis access not to be monitored for adverse reactions and education regarding dialysis complications were discussed. Resident 128 (R128) R128 was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including chronic kidney disease and rheumatoid arthritis. 1) On 02/27/2024 (Tuesday) at 10:50 AM, R128 was seen leaving the facility for dialysis treatment. R128 was in the wheelchair and indicated the usual schedule for dialysis treatment was Monday, Wednesday, and Friday (MWF) and was going today due to missing yesterday's treatment due to not feeling well. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review the facility failed to ensure 1) a consent was obtained prior to administering the psychotropic medication for 1 of 34 sampled residents (Resident 80), 2) a valid consent (with signature of the resident or representative) for the use of psychotropic medication for 1 of 34 sampled residents (Resident 91) was obtained, and 3) a consent for the use of psychotropic medication was obtained for 1 of 34 sampled residents (Resident 150). The deficient practice had a potential for a resident/resident representative not being properly informed of the risk and benefits of a prescribed psychotropic medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure 1) a resident had orders and assessment for self-medicating and medications were properly secured in the resident's room for 1 of 34 sampled residents (Resident 94). and 2) biologicals such as vaccines were stored in accordance with manufacturer's guidelines. The deficient practices had a potential for a resident to improperly administer and store medications and improper vaccine storage could potentially affect the potency and effectiveness of the medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure concerns raised by the resident group regarding call light response times were communicated to the Administrator, the facility's response and actions were communicated back to the resident group, and the resident group response was obtained and documented in accordance with the facility's policy. The deficient practice potentially denied the facility's leadership from verifying, tracking, and developing meaningful interventions to address the resident's ongoing issues regarding call light response times.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure a resident was not restrained to the bed frame for 1 of 14 sampled residents (Resident 5). The deficient practice had the potential to cause the resident physical, emotional and mental distress.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to provide necessary services for personal hygiene for 1 of 14 sampled residents (Resident 12) who was unable to carry out activities of daily living including elimination. The deficient practice had the potential to cause adverse physical and mental outcomes such as skin damage and loss of dignity. Resident 12 (R12) R12 was admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including fracture of the sacrum, and multiple other fractures, and difficulty walking. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated the resident required assistance of two persons to transfer, assist of one person to ambulate, and required the assistance of one person for toileting and hygiene care. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, record review and document review, the facility failed to ensure an admission social services assessment was completed for 1 of 14 sampled residents (Resident 3) and failed to ensure there were sufficient number of social services staff members in accordance with the facility assessment. The deficient practice had the potential for the facility not meeting the social services needs of the residents.
30 fire safety citations on file: 6 on March 27, 2026, 9 on March 18, 2025, 15 on March 1, 2024.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
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) | 3.62 | 4.34 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.84 | 1.12 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.28 | 3.86 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.18 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.61 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 41.6% | 45.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 22.2% | 43.4% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.80 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 3.76 on weekdays and 3.28 on weekends, 13% 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 3.47 in April to June 2025 to 3.62 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 | 3.62 | 0.84 | 3.76 | 3.28 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 169 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.46 | 0.70 | 3.56 | 3.18 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 171 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.39 | 0.66 | 3.50 | 3.12 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 170 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.47 | 0.62 | 3.60 | 3.16 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 168 |
| 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.
| 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 | 3.6 | 12.6 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.3 | 1.6 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.1 | 1.9 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.3 | 2.0 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 1.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.1 | 13.5 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 9.3 | 5.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.8 | 17.1 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 25.0 | 23.2 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 5.3 | 9.6 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.7 | 1.9 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.1 | 1.4 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for The Heights of Summerlin, LLC's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (43.1% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
43.1% 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. 60 eligible stays.
10.1% 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. 106 eligible stays.
8.6% 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. 77 eligible stays.
36.6% 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. 41 residents counted.
1.3% 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. 77 residents counted.
1.1% 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. 77 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. 18 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: THE HEIGHTS OF SUMMERLIN, LLC. CMS links this home to Genesis Healthcare, a group of 184 nursing homes averaging 2.3 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ghc Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 50% | 02/01/2020 |
| Sundance Rehabilitation Holdco Inc | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/01/2020 | |
| Welltower Op, LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/01/2020 | |
| Zac Properties XI LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 02/01/2020 | |
| Fishman, Steven | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 02/01/2020 | |
| Robin, Aaron | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 08/15/2023 | |
| Tress, Avrohom | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 08/15/2023 | |
| Harris, Kimberly | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/06/2022 | |
| Najmi, Mohammed | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2011 | |
| Rotich, Shekeidra | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/07/2022 | |
| Shaw, Pamela | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/01/2020 | |
| Tress, Avrohom | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/01/2020 | |
| Newgen Administrative Services, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 02/01/2020 | |
| Powerback Rehabilitation LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 02/01/2020 | |
| Harris, Kimberly | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/06/2022 | |
| Najmi, Mohammed | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2011 | |
| Rotich, Shekeidra | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 03/07/2022 | |
| Shaw, Pamela | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/01/2020 | |
| Tress, Avrohom | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/01/2020 |
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.