Riverway Assisted Living and Memory Care.
Riverway Assisted Living and Memory Care is Ranked in the bottom 47% of Utah memory care with 4 DLBC citations on record; last inspected Nov 2024.
A large home, reviewed on public record.
Compared to 35 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.
among peers to rank.
Rankings based on 36-month CDSS inspection data. Severity and frequency: fewer citations = higher percentile. Repeat rate: lower repeat citation share = higher percentile.
FACILITY WATCH · BETA
Riverway Assisted Living and Memory Care has 4 citations on record. Know the moment anything changes.
New findings, complaint investigations, or status changes — emailed to you free.
Citation history, plotted month by month.
4 deficiencies on record. Each bar is a month with a citation.
Finding distribution
4 total · 36 monthsScope × Severity (CMS A–L)
Every DLBC visit, verbatim.
4 inspections in the public record, most recent first. Click any row to expand — cited rows open automatically.
2024-11-25Annual Compliance VisitNo findings
2024-08-19Annual Compliance VisitSerious · 1 finding
Plain-language summary
During an annual inspection, the facility was found noncompliant with emergency evacuation planning requirements under Rule R432-270-11. Of three residents receiving hospice care who would require significant assistance to evacuate, two did not have evacuation plans integrated into their service plans and one had no evacuation plan at all. The facility was required to correct these deficiencies to ensure all residents have documented evacuation procedures appropriate to their care needs.
“The provider was out of compliance with this rule by not ensuring that the emergency evacuation plans were developed or were integrated into resident service plans. During the inspection, 3 residents were identified to be receiving hospice services and were not capable to evacuate the facility without significant assistance. 2 residents did not have their evacuation plan integrated into the service plan and 1 resident did not have an emergency evacuation plan.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
[R432-270-11(10)(a)-(c)] The provider was out of compliance with this rule by not ensuring that the emergency evacuation plans were developed or were integrated into resident service plans. During the inspection, 3 residents were identified to be receiving hospice services and were not capable to evacuate the facility without significant assistance. 2 residents did not have their evacuation plan integrated into the service plan and 1 resident did not have an emergency evacuation plan.
2024-04-16Annual Compliance VisitNo findings
2024-03-28Complaint InvestigationSerious · 3 findings
Plain-language summary
During a routine inspection, the facility was found to have restricted a resident's freedom to leave, contrary to licensing requirements that residents retain the right to exit at any time. The inspector identified two discharged residents who had experienced physical and sexual abuse and exploitation, and determined the administrator failed to investigate these incidents or report them to state authorities as required. Additionally, unlicensed staff were administering "as needed" medications without first consulting a licensed healthcare professional, which exceeds the scope of care permitted at a Type II assisted living facility.
“The provider was out of compliance with this rule by not ensuring resident rights included the right to leave the facility at any time and not be locked on the facility premises during the day or night. During the inspection, one (1) current resident was identified as not having the right to leave the facility at any time and not be locked on the facility premises during the day or night.”
“The provider was out of compliance with this rule by not ensuring the administrator completed an investigation when there was reason to believe a resident had been subjected to abuse or exploitation and report any suspected abuse or exploitation in accordance with Section 62A-3-305. During the inspection, two (2) discharged residents were identified as having been subjected to physical and sexual abuse and exploitation and the facility Administrator did not complete an investigation when there was reason to believe the residents had been subjected to physical and sexual abuse and exploitation and did not report the suspected abuse and exploitation in according with Section 62A-3-305.”
“The provider was out of compliance with this rule by not ensuring that a type II did not provide skilled nursing care. During the inspection, unlicensed staff were identified as making the determination to administer "as needed" medications without notifying a licensed health care professional before administering the "as needed" medication.”
Read raw inspector notesClose inspector notes
[R432-270-10(5)(a)-(x)] The provider was out of compliance with this rule by not ensuring resident rights included the right to leave the facility at any time and not be locked on the facility premises during the day or night. During the inspection, one (1) current resident was identified as not having the right to leave the facility at any time and not be locked on the facility premises during the day or night. [R432-270-8(1)(a)-(p)] The provider was out of compliance with this rule by not ensuring the administrator completed an investigation when there was reason to believe a resident had been subjected to abuse or exploitation and report any suspected abuse or exploitation in accordance with Section 62A-3-305. During the inspection, two (2) discharged residents were identified as having been subjected to physical and sexual abuse and exploitation and the facility Administrator did not complete an investigation when there was reason to believe the residents had been subjected to physical and sexual abuse and exploitation and did not report the suspected abuse and exploitation in according with Section 62A-3-305. [R432-270-15(5)(a)-(b)] The provider was out of compliance with this rule by not ensuring that a type II did not provide skilled nursing care. During the inspection, unlicensed staff were identified as making the determination to administer "as needed" medications without notifying a licensed health care professional before administering the "as needed" medication.
Other facilities in South Jordan.
Other memory care facilities near South Jordan with similar care offerings.
Family reviews
No reviews yet — be the first to share your experience