How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
1521 North Pine Cliff Drive, Flagstaff, AZ 86001 (opens Google Maps) · Coconino County · (928) 440-2350· 50 certified beds · avg 42 residents/day · certified since Oct 11, 2018 · Medicare only — not Medicaid certified
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: THE GOODMAN GROUP (9 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · 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.
Showing the latest 3 of 19 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint F-0609
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
The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint F-0609
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Aug 21, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Aug 21, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Aug 7, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Aug 22, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide basic life support, such as CPR, before emergency medical help arrived — care that's required when it matches the doctor's orders and the resident's own written wishes. · F-0678 |
| Aug 22, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Aug 22, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698 |
| Aug 22, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761 |
| Aug 22, 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 |
| Aug 22, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Aug 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. · F-0622 |
| Aug 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655 |
| Aug 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658 |
| Aug 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Aug 18, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · F-0757 |
| Aug 18, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881 |
| Aug 18, 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 |
| Aug 18, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Aug 18, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Aug 18, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (10 → 1).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 6 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 10 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 3 | 0 | E |
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.
How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 3.89 | 3.97 | 3.95 | top 38% in Arizona; top 44% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.55 | 0.69 | 0.69 | top 3% in Arizona; top 4% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.50 | 3.50 | 3.50 | top 35% in Arizona; top 42% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 1.20 | 0.49 | 0.48 | top 4% in Arizona; top 3% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 47.8 | 45.2 | 45.8 | bottom 41% in Arizona; bottom 42% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 40.0 | 43.6 | 42.9 | top 39% in Arizona; top 46% 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 4.16, RN 1.66, weekend 3.74.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.16 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: —/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Aspire Transitional Care. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 →
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Edinger, Craig | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 14% | 01/01/2024 |
| Flagstaff Transitional Care, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 02/14/2020 |
| Goodman, Shane | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 14% | 01/01/2024 |
| Reiling, Mark | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 14% | 01/01/2024 |
| Salmen, Thomas | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 14% | 01/01/2024 |
| The Goodman Family Operating Foundation | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 01/01/2024 |
| Weichert, James | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 14% | 01/01/2024 |
| Wilson, Mark | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 14% | 01/01/2024 |
| Dorris, Keith | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2020 |
| Ebeid, Sadek | Individual | Contracted Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2020 |
| Edinger, Craig | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Goodman, Shane | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Knacke, Clinton | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Knacke, Clinton | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/12/2022 |
| Reiling, Mark | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Salmen, Thomas | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Salmen, Thomas | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Weichert, James | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Wilson, Mark | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Wilson, Mark | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
All 20 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
CMS lists this facility under the chain The Goodman Group — 9 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.
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Haven of Flagstaff | 2.0 mi | Flagstaff, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| The Peaks Health & Rehabilitation | 2.1 mi | Flagstaff, AZ | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 2 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Coconino, AZ — 4 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
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 035296.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details