Certified for Medicare only. Medicare pays for short rehabilitation stays, not for long-term care — and this facility cannot bill Medicaid, which is what most families rely on for a long stay. Ask what a long-term stay here would cost and how it would be paid for. Who pays for nursing home care →
Part of chain: ADVANCED HEALTH CARE (26 facilities, chain avg rating 4.8★)
5/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jul 18, 2025
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Jul 23, 2024
$8,018
Fines, last 3 years
4.34
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Aug 28, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 9 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. F-0880
G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. F-0684
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. F-0812
View all 9 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
Date
Severity
What the facility was cited for
Jul 18, 2025
C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Jul 23, 2024
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Jul 23, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Jul 21, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. · F-0554
Jul 21, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Jul 21, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690
Jul 21, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695
Jul 21, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697
Jul 21, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign. · F-0847
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 1).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations:
6
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2024
All citations:
2
Serious citations (G–L):
1
2025
All citations:
1
Serious citations (G–L):
0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2023
6
0
D
2024
2
1
G ▲
2025
1
0
C
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
Date
Type
Amount / length
Jul 23, 2024
Fine
$8,018
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityNevada averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
4.34
Nevada average:
4.05
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
1.70
Nevada average:
0.98
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
3.67
Nevada average:
3.61
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
Nevada avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
4.34
4.05
3.95
top 25% in Nevada; top 28% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
1.70
0.98
0.69
top 8% in Nevada; top 3% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
3.67
3.61
3.50
top 32% in Nevada; top 34% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
1.78
0.87
0.48
top 11% in Nevada; top 1% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
37.7
45.1
45.8
top 28% in Nevada; top 30% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
22.2
43.4
42.9
top 10% in Nevada; top 17% in the U.S.
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 5.95, RN 2.33, weekend 5.03.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.95 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Advanced Health Care of Henderson. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
All 7 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Advanced Health Care — 26 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
CMS records place this facility in Clark, NV — 42 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.