Good Life Senior Living Mount Pleasant.
A medium home, reviewed on public record.
Compared to 16 Utah facilities with a similar number of beds.
Care · 36-month window. Higher percentile = better performance on inspection record. Source: Utah Dept. of Health & Human Services · Division of Licensing and Background Checks.
Rankings based on 36-month DLBC inspection data. Severity and frequency: fewer citations = higher percentile. Repeat rate: lower repeat citation share = higher percentile.
Citation history, plotted month by month.
5 deficiencies on record. Each bar is a month with a citation.
Finding distribution
5 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.
2026-01-28Annual Compliance VisitNo findings
2024-05-30Annual Compliance VisitNo findings
2024-04-04Annual Compliance VisitSerious · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
During the annual inspection, the facility was found to operate a secured unit with a locked entrance requiring a keypad to exit, but had not obtained approval for secure unit beds as required by licensing rules. This noncompliance means the facility was operating a locked memory care unit without the proper authorization from the Division of Licensing and Background Checks. The status of corrections to resolve this issue was not documented in the inspection findings.
Read full citation text (1)Hide full citation text
“The provider was out of compliance with this rule by operating a secured facility without approved secure unit beds. During the inspection, the licensor observed that the entrance door was locked and secured with a required key pad to exit the facility.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
[R432-270-16(1)] The provider was out of compliance with this rule by operating a secured facility without approved secure unit beds. During the inspection, the licensor observed that the entrance door was locked and secured with a required key pad to exit the facility.
2024-03-07Annual Compliance VisitSerious · 2 findings
Plain-language summary
During this annual inspection, the facility was found to have one resident whose mobility and evacuation needs exceeded what the facility was licensed to provide—specifically, the resident required more than limited assistance from one person to safely exit the building during an emergency. The facility was also operating a secured unit without having the required state approval for secure beds, with all exit doors controlled by keypads. Both issues constituted noncompliance with Utah licensing rules.
Read full citation text (2)Hide full citation text
“The provider was out of compliance with this rule by retaining a resident who was not capable of evacuating the facility with the limited assistance of one person. During the inspection, 1 resident was not capable of evacuating the facility with the limited assistance of one person.”
“The provider was out of compliance with this rule by operating a secured facility without approved secure unit beds. During the inspection, the licensor observed that all egress points in the facility were secured with a required key pad to exit the facility.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
[R432-270-11(5)(a-c)] The provider was out of compliance with this rule by retaining a resident who was not capable of evacuating the facility with the limited assistance of one person. During the inspection, 1 resident was not capable of evacuating the facility with the limited assistance of one person. [R432-270-16(1)] The provider was out of compliance with this rule by operating a secured facility without approved secure unit beds. During the inspection, the licensor observed that all egress points in the facility were secured with a required key pad to exit the facility.
2024-02-12Annual Compliance VisitSerious · 2 findings
Plain-language summary
During an annual inspection, the facility was found to operate a locked-door secured unit without state approval for secure unit beds, with staff confirming that residents could not exit without a key code. The facility also retained a resident whose evacuation needs—requiring either one person's extensive assistance or two people's assistance at different times—exceeded the one-person limited assistance threshold required for operation at that facility level.
Read full citation text (2)Hide full citation text
“The provider was out of compliance with this rule by operating a secured facility without approved secure unit beds. During the inspection, the licensor observed that all egress points in the facility were secured with a required key pad to exit the facility. Several staff were interviewed and indicated that residents did not have the key code to exit and enter the building.”
“The provider was out of compliance with this rule by retaining a resident who was not capable of evacuating the facility with the limited assistance of one person. During the inspection, resident records were reviewed, one resident required 1 person extensive assistance and at other times 2 person assist.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
[R432-270-16(1)] The provider was out of compliance with this rule by operating a secured facility without approved secure unit beds. During the inspection, the licensor observed that all egress points in the facility were secured with a required key pad to exit the facility. Several staff were interviewed and indicated that residents did not have the key code to exit and enter the building. [R432-270-11(5)(a-c)] The provider was out of compliance with this rule by retaining a resident who was not capable of evacuating the facility with the limited assistance of one person. During the inspection, resident records were reviewed, one resident required 1 person extensive assistance and at other times 2 person assist.
Contract Decoder
Family reviews
No reviews yet — be the first to share your experience