Arizona · Phoenix

Quality Senior Care.

Care Facility10 bedsDementia-trained staff(623) 565-7308
Limited Inspection History · fewer than 4 records in 3 years
Peer rank
Top 29% of Arizona memory care
See full peer rank →
Facility · Phoenix
A 10-bed Care Facility with 4 citations on file.
Licensed beds
10
Last inspection
Jul 2025
Last citation
Jul 2025
Operated by
Snapshot

A medium home, reviewed on public record.

Quality Senior Care

© Google Street View

Map showing location of Quality Senior Care
© Mapbox · OpenStreetMap
Peer Comparison

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.

Severity rank
54th%
Weighted citations per bed.
peer median
0
100
Repeat rank
Not enough repeat citations
among peers to rank.
Repeat deficiencies as share of total.
Frequency rank
60th%
Deficiencies per inspection.
peer median
0
100

Rankings based on 36-month ADHS inspection data. Severity and frequency: fewer citations = higher percentile. Repeat rate: lower repeat citation share = higher percentile.

Save for comparison:
The Record

Citation history, plotted month by month.

4 deficiencies on record. Each bar is a month with a citation.

Peer median 1 · dashed
Last citation: JUL 2025. Compared against peer median (dashed).
peer median
JUL 2025
Sep 2024as of Aug 2026

Finding distribution

4 total · 36 months

Scope × Severity (CMS A–L)

Isolated
Pattern
Widespread
Sev 4 · IJ
J
K
L
Sev 3
G
H
I
Sev 2
D4
E
F
Sev 1
A
B
C
Full Inspection Record

Every inspection visit, verbatim.

2 inspections in the public record, most recent first. Plain-language summaries open first — click into any row for the full citation text.

2
reports on file
4
total deficiencies
2025-07-10
Annual Compliance Visit
R9-10-806.A.8 · 2 findings

Facility Watch · Premium

Monitor this facility.

We'll notify you if anything changes.

Official inspection and license-record changes for Quality Senior Care, plus news, public reviews, and complaint mentions across the web — usually within a day of appearing online. Nothing is swept under the rug.

  • Official inspection and license-record alerts (included)
  • Broader web mentions: news, enforcement, lawsuits, closures
  • Public review and complaint mentions online
  • Source-linked alerts, usually within a day

$9/month or $59/year · Cancel anytime

Payment is processed by Stripe. Monitoring is activated within one business day. Web and review mentions are best-effort from what we can find publicly. Cancel anytime from your billing link.

R9-10-806.A.8A.A.C. § RR9-10-806.A.8
Verbatim citation text · A.A.C. § RR9-10-806.A.8

Based on record review and interview, the manager failed to ensure a manager, a caregiver, and an assistant caregiver, or an employee or a volunteer who has or is expected to have more than eight hours per week of direct interaction with residents, provided evidence of freedom from infectious tuberculosis (TB) as specified in R9-10-113, for two of three employees sampled. Findings include: 1 . A review of E1's and E2's personnel records revealed documentation of TB skin tests. However, documentation of a TB questionnaire was not available for review at the time of inspection. 2 . In an interview, E2 acknowledged E1's and E2's personnel files did not contain documentation of a TB questionnaire at the time of inspection.

R9-10-820.A.14A.A.C. § RR9-10-820.A.14
Verbatim citation text · A.A.C. § RR9-10-820.A.14

Based on documentation review and interview, the manager failed to ensure if pets or animals are allowed in the assisted living facility, pets or animals were licensed consistent with local ordinances. Findings include: 1 . A review of facility documentation revealed a pet record for O1. O1 had documentation of vaccination for rabies. However, O1 had no documentation of registration with Maricopa County at the time of inspection. 2 . In an interview, E2 acknowledged O1 had no documentation of registration with Maricopa County at the time of inspection.

2024-01-19
Annual Compliance Visit
A.A.C. · 2 findings
A.A.C.
Verbatim citation text

Based on documentation review and interview, the manager failed to ensure the disaster plan required in subsection (A)(1) was reviewed at least once every 12 months. The deficient practice posed a risk if employees were unable to implement the facility's disaster plan in an emergency. Findings include: 1. A review of facility documentation revealed no documentation to indicate the facility's disaster plan was reviewed at least once every 12 months. 2. In an interview, E1 acknowledged the disaster plan required in subsection (A)(1) was not reviewed at least once every 12 months.

A.A.C.
Verbatim citation text

Based on documentation review and interview, the manager failed to ensure an employee disaster drill was conducted on each shift at least once every three months and documented. The deficient practice posed a risk if employees were unable to implement a disaster plan. Findings include: 1. A review of facility documentation revealed a document titled "Monthly Work Schedule." The document indicated the facility operated on two shifts: "Day (D) 7am to 7pm" and "Night (N) 7pm to 7am." 2. A review of facility documentation revealed disaster drills conducted on the following dates, times and shifts: -June 1, 2023, 7:00 PM, Night Shift; -September 1, 2023, 11:00 AM; Day Shift; and -December 1, 2023, 3:00 PM; Day Shift. No other documentation of disaster drills was provided for review. 3. In an interview, E1 acknowledged an employee disaster drill was not conducted on each shift at least once every three months and documented.

Family reviews

No reviews yet — be the first to share your experience

Related in this city

Other memory care options nearby.

Is this listing wrong? Report an issue →
Reports help us maintain accurate facility information. Your report will be reviewed within 1-2 business days.