Sunrise of Chandler.

A large home, reviewed on public record.

© Google Street View
Compared to 75 Arizona facilities with a similar number of beds.
Care · 36-month window. Higher percentile = better performance on inspection record. Source: Arizona Dept. of Health Services · Bureau of Residential Facilities Licensing.
among peers to rank.
Rankings based on 36-month ADHS inspection data. Severity and frequency: fewer citations = higher percentile. Repeat rate: lower repeat citation share = higher percentile.
Citation history, plotted month by month.
3 deficiencies on record. Each bar is a month with a citation.
Finding distribution
3 total · 36 monthsScope × Severity (CMS A–L)
Every inspection visit, verbatim.
5 inspections in the public record, most recent first. Plain-language summaries open first — click into any row for the full citation text.
2026-07-07Complaint InvestigationNo findings
2026-05-06Complaint InvestigationNo findings
2026-04-08Complaint InvestigationNo findings
2026-01-29Complaint InvestigationNo findings
2025-09-23Annual Compliance VisitR9-10-113.A · 3 findings
“Based on documentation review and interview, the health care institution failed to establish, document, and implement tuberculosis (TB) infection control activities, including annually assessing the health care institution's risk of exposure to infectious TB. The deficient practice posed a TB exposure risk to residents and staff. Findings include: 1. A review of the facility’s documentation revealed an incomplete annual assessment of the facility's TB risk assessment for 2024, with no signatures. No other current documentation of an annual assessment was available. 2. In an interview, E9 acknowledged that an assessment of the health care institution's risk of exposure to infectious TB was not conducted. 3. In an exit interview, the findings were reviewed with E8 and E9, and no additional information was provided.”
“Based on documentation review, record review, and interview, the manager failed to ensure a resident provided documentation of freedom from infectious tuberculosis (TB) as specified in R9-10-113, for eight of eight residents sampled. The deficient practice posed a high potential health and safety risk to residents and staff of TB exposure. Findings include: 1. R9-10-113.A states "If a health care institution is subject to the requirements of this Section, as specified in an Article in this Chapter, the health care institution's chief administrative officer shall ensure that the health care institution establishes, documents, and implements tuberculosis infection control activities that...2. Include: a. For each individual who is employed by the health care institution, provides volunteer services for the health care institution, or is admitted to the health care institution and who is subject to the requirements of this Section, screening, on or before the date specified in the applicable Article of this Chapter, that consists of: i. Assessing risks of prior exposure to infectious tuberculosis, ii. Determining if the individual has signs or symptoms of tuberculosis, and iii. Obtaining documentation of the individual's freedom from infectious tuberculosis according to subsection (B)(1)..." 2. A review of R1's, R2’s, R3’s, R4’s, R5’s, R6’s, R7’s, and R8’s medical records revealed no documentation of an assessment of the residents' risk of exposure to infectious TB. Based on the acceptance dates, this documentation was required. 3. A review of the facility's policies and procedures revealed a policy titled “TB Screening.” The policy stated, “ For states/provinces requiring TB screening/testing, requirements may include: Risk evaluation, symptom screening, and IGRA blood test.” 4. In an interview, E9 acknowledged that an assessment of the resident’s risk of exposure to infectious TB was not conducted. 5. In an exit interview, the findings were reviewed with E8 and E9, and no additional information was provided.”
“Based on record review and interview, the manager failed to ensure a medication was administered in compliance with a medication order for one of eight residents reviewed. The deficient practice posed a risk if the resident experienced a change in condition due to improper administration of medication. Findings include: 1. A review of R3's medical record revealed a current written service plan dated September 3, 2025. This service plan indicated R3 received medication administration. 2. A review of R3's medical record revealed signed medication orders dated June 9, 2025. The medication order stated “Propranolol HCl Oral Tablet 20 mg. Give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day related to Essential Hypertension. Hold for SBP less than 100 or HR less than 60.” 3. A review of R3's medical record revealed a September 2025 medication administration record (MAR). This MAR stated “Propranolol HCl Oral Tablet 20 mg. Give 1 tablet by mouth two times a day related to Essential Hypertension. Hold for SBP less than 100 or HR less than 60.” “Propranolol” was administered on the following dates: September 2, 2025, between 1900-2100 with R3’s heart rate (HR) at 56 September 15, 2025 between 0700 - 0900 with R3’s HR at 58 September 21, 2025 between 0700 - 0900 with R3’s HR at 57 September 22, 2025 between 0700 - 0900 with R3’s HR at 47 4. In an interview, E8 acknowledged that “Propranolol” was supposed to be held on those dates. 5. In an exit interview, the findings were reviewed with E8 and E9, and no additional information was provided.”
1 older inspection from 2023 are not shown above.
Get the complete record, translated into plain language — emailed to you.
Other facilities in Chandler.
Other memory care facilities near Chandler with similar care offerings.
Full Inspection Record
Family reviews
No reviews yet — be the first to share your experience



