Arizona Care L.l.c..

A medium home, reviewed on public record.

© Google Street View
Compared to 1,661 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.
2 deficiencies on record. Each bar is a month with a citation.
Finding distribution
2 total · 36 monthsScope × Severity (CMS A–L)
Every inspection visit, verbatim.
1 inspection in the public record, most recent first. Plain-language summaries open first — click into any row for the full citation text.
2025-06-13Annual Compliance VisitR9-10-815.A · 2 findings
“Based on record review and interview, the manager failed to ensure a resident's representative was designated for a resident who was unable to direct self-care. Findings include: 1 . A review of R2's medical record revealed service plan reviews for directed care from September 2024, December 2024, March 2025, and May 2025. However, R2 signed for each service plan update listed while R2 received directed care services. 2 . In an interview, E3 acknowledged a resident's representative was not designated for a resident who was unable to direct self-care. E3 reported E3 would talk to the nurse to make sure R2 did require directed care services, as R2 was still cognitive, just needed assistance with various services, and was able to inform staff of needs.”
“Based on observation and interview, the manager failed to ensure there is a means of exiting the facility for a resident who does not have a key, special knowledge for egress, or the ability to expend increased physical effort which provides access to an outside area which controls or alerts employees of the egress of a resident from the facility. The deficient practice posed a risk if the facility was unaware of the general or specific whereabouts of a resident. Findings include: 1 . During an environmental inspection of the facility, the Compliance Officer observed a door leading to the backyard with no control and alerts along the door frame. However, the alerts were not functioning at the time of inspection. E2 restarted the system, and the door alert functioned briefly, but then stopped due to a low battery. E2 was unable to determine how long the back door alert had not been functioning correctly. 2 . In an interview, E3 acknowledged the back door was not controlled and did not alert employees of the egress of a resident from the facility.”
1 older inspection from 2023 are not shown above.
Get the complete record, translated into plain language — emailed to you.
Other facilities in Surprise.
Other memory care facilities near Surprise with similar care offerings.
Facility Watch · Premium
Family reviews
No reviews yet — be the first to share your experience


