Desert Palm On Belmont.

A medium home, reviewed on public record.

© Google Street View
Compared to 1,649 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.
3 inspections in the public record, most recent first. Plain-language summaries open first — click into any row for the full citation text.
2026-01-07Complaint InvestigationA.A.C. · 1 finding
“Based on record review and interview, the health care institution failed to develop and administer a training program for all staff regarding fall prevention and fall recovery that included initial training and continued competency training as required by A.R.S. § 36-420.01.A, for two of two personnel reviewed. 1. A review of E1's personnel record revealed that E1 did not have documentation of completed Fall Prevention/Fall Recovery training available for review at the time of the inspection. 2. A review of E2's personnel record revealed that E2 did not have documentation of completed Fall Prevention/Fall Recovery training available for review at the time of the inspection. 3. In an interview, E3 acknowledged that E1 and E2 did not have documentation of completed Fall Prevention/Fall Recovery training available for review at the time of the inspection. 4. In an exit interview, the findings were reviewed with E3, and no additional information was provided.”
2025-08-15Complaint InvestigationR9-10-808.A.4.b · 2 findings
“Based on observation, record review, and interview, the manager failed to ensure that service plans were updated at the personal care level for two of eight residents sampled. The deficient practice posed a risk as there was no service plan to direct services to be provided to a resident. Findings include: 1. The Compliance Officer observed that the day of the inspection was August 15, 2025. 2. Record review established that R1 and R2 were both at the personal level of care. 3. Record review established that R1’s service plan was due to be updated on July 28, 2025. R1’s service plan was not updated as of the date of the inspection. 4. Record review established that R2’s service plan had last been updated on June 24, 2024. 5. In an interview, E1 confirmed that R1 and R2 were both at the personal level of care. E1 also confirmed that R1’s service plan was due to be updated on July 28, 2025. R1’s service plan was not updated. E1 also confirmed that R2’s service plan had last been updated on June 24, 2024.”
“Based on record review and interview, the manager failed to ensure that a resident had a signed and dated resident agreement for one of eight residents sampled. The deficient practice posed a risk if the service plan was not developed to articulate decisions and agreements. Findings include: 1. Record review established that R7 had a service plan which was created on August 20, 2025. This service plan was not signed by the resident or the resident’s representative. 2. In an interview, E1 confirmed that R7 had a service plan that was created on August 20, 2025. E1 confirmed that this service plan was not signed by the resident or the resident’s representative.”
2024-02-21Annual Compliance VisitNo findings
Other facilities in Phoenix.
Other memory care facilities near Phoenix with similar care offerings.
Facility Watch · Premium
Family reviews
No reviews yet — be the first to share your experience



