How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Arizona State Veteran Home-Tucson
555 East Ajo Way, Tucson, AZ 85713 (opens Google Maps) · Pima County · (520) 638-2150· 120 certified beds · avg 117 residents/day · certified since Feb 23, 2012 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 10, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
6.44
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5 · how star ratings work →
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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 15 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. F-0851
The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. F-0644
The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. F-0645
View all 15 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 10, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · F-0851 |
| Apr 10, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. · F-0644 |
| Apr 10, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. · F-0645 |
| Dec 29, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| Dec 29, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint · F-0602 |
| Nov 13, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0812 |
| Jan 5, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · F-0758 |
| Jan 5, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jan 5, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · F-0623 |
| Sep 30, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Sep 30, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806 |
| Sep 30, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Sep 30, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · F-0688 |
| Sep 30, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide routine dental care and 24-hour emergency dental care for residents. · F-0790 |
| Sep 30, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (3 → 3).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 3
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 6 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 3 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 3 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 3 | 0 | F |
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.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityArizona averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 6.44
Arizona average: 3.97
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.90
Arizona average: 0.69
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 5.91
Arizona average: 3.50
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Arizona avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 6.44 | 3.97 | 3.95 | top 5% in Arizona; top 3% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.90 | 0.69 | 0.69 | top 19% in Arizona; top 21% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 5.91 | 3.50 | 3.50 | top 4% in Arizona; top 2% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.54 | 0.49 | 0.48 | top 29% in Arizona; top 29% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | — | 45.2 | 45.8 | — |
| RN turnover (%) | — | 43.6 | 42.9 | — |
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 5.05, RN 0.70, weekend 4.63.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.05 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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.
Quality measures rating: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Arizona State Veteran Home-Tucson. 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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
Who owns this facility
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
Government - State
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arizona Department of Veterans Services | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 01/31/2011 |
| Coady, Maureen | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/31/2011 |
All 2 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do your actual daily staffing levels compare to what's reported on Medicare's Care Compare website?"
- "How do you identify and arrange specialized services for residents with mental health conditions or disabilities?"
- "How do you screen new residents for mental health and disability-related needs, and how do you provide the specialized services they require?"
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "What safeguards do you have to protect residents' money and belongings, and what happens when something goes missing?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "What is your approach to psychiatric medications — how do you try non-drug options first and work to reduce doses over time?"
- "If you ever planned to discharge or transfer my family member, how much written notice would we receive and how could we appeal?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 21 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sandstone of Tucson Rehab Centre | 1.8 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Park Avenue Health and Rehabilitation Center | 4.7 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Catalina Post Acute and Rehabilitation | 5.3 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Santa Rosa Care Center | 6.1 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Villa Maria Post Acute and Rehabilitation | 6.1 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Handmaker Home for the Aging | 6.7 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Foothills Rehabilitation Center | 6.8 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Pueblo Springs Rehabilitation Center | 6.9 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Center at Tucson | 6.9 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Sabino Canyon Rehabilitation & Care Center | 6.9 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Haven of Saguaro Valley | 7.2 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Sandstone Estates Rehab Centre | 7.6 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Pima, AZ — 24 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Brookdale Santa Catalina — Tucson, AZ · overall 4/5
- Casas Adobes Post Acute Rehab Center — Tucson, AZ · overall 3/5abuse
- Devon Gables Rehabilitation Center — Tucson, AZ · overall 2/5abuse
- Haven Health Green Valley, LLC — Green Valley, AZ · overall 5/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 035284.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).