Cascades at Desert View

820 Sprague Avenue, Buhl, ID 83316 (opens Google Maps) · Twin Falls County · (208) 543-6401· 57 certified beds · avg 36 residents/day · certified since Oct 1, 1981 · 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 →

SFF Candidate

What Special Focus status means →

Part of chain: CASCADES HEALTHCARE (19 facilities, chain avg rating 1.9★)

1/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

inspected May 15, 2026

Serious findings on record

most recent May 31, 2024

Fines, last 3 years

3.35

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5 · 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 31, 2024 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.

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: Feb 14, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 52 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

May 15, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly. · from a complaint F-0585
May 15, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · from a complaint F-0727
May 15, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint F-0804

View all 52 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
May 15, 2026	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly. · from a complaint · F-0585
May 15, 2026	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · from a complaint · F-0727
May 15, 2026	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint · F-0804
May 15, 2026	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	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
May 15, 2026	F · Potential for more than 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
May 15, 2026	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility's activities program was not run by a qualified professional. The person directing recreation and social activities must have proper training or credentials. · from a complaint · F-0680
May 15, 2026	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
May 15, 2026	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · from a complaint · F-0732
May 15, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · from a complaint · F-0550
May 15, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · from a complaint · F-0552
May 15, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · F-0558
May 15, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · from a complaint · F-0582
May 15, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function. · from a complaint · F-0605
May 15, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · from a complaint · F-0628
May 15, 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. · from a complaint · F-0645
May 15, 2026	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. · from a complaint · F-0655
May 15, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint · F-0656
May 15, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · from a complaint · F-0657
May 15, 2026	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. · from a complaint · F-0658
May 15, 2026	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. · from a complaint · F-0688
May 15, 2026	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. · from a complaint · F-0695
May 15, 2026	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. · from a complaint · F-0842
Nov 19, 2025	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	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
Nov 19, 2025	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · from a complaint · F-0925
Apr 3, 2025	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657
Apr 3, 2025	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. · F-0947
Apr 3, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552
Apr 3, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Apr 3, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
Apr 3, 2025	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
Apr 3, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal 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
Apr 3, 2025	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
Apr 3, 2025	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
Apr 3, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756
Apr 3, 2025	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
Apr 3, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759
Apr 3, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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
Apr 3, 2025	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
Apr 3, 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
May 31, 2024	▲ G · Actual 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
May 31, 2024	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	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
May 31, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · from a complaint · F-0578
May 31, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · from a complaint · F-0625
May 31, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	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. · from a complaint · F-0880
May 31, 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. · from a complaint · F-0622
May 31, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · from a complaint · F-0641
May 31, 2024	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. · from a complaint · F-0644
May 31, 2024	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. · from a complaint · F-0695
May 31, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. · from a complaint · F-0700
May 31, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · from a complaint · F-0883
May 31, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not regularly inspect bed frames, mattresses, and bed rails for safety, or the rails and mattresses were not attached safely to the frames. · from a complaint · F-0909
May 31, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · from a complaint · F-0919

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (15 → 22).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01

All citationsSerious citations (G–L)

2024

2025

2026

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

Year	Citations	Serious (G–L)	Worst severity that year
2024	13	1	G ▲
2025	17	0	F
2026	22	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)

How to file a complaint about care →

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01

This facilityIdaho averageU.S. average

Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)

3.35

4.03

3.95

Registered Nurse hours

0.51

0.87

0.69

Weekend total nurse staffing

2.95

3.48

3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

Measure	This facility	Idaho avg	U.S. avg	Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)	3.35	4.03	3.95	bottom 28% in Idaho; bottom 29% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.51	0.87	0.69	bottom 17% in Idaho; bottom 40% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	2.95	3.48	3.50	bottom 30% in Idaho; bottom 28% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.47	0.56	0.48	bottom 41% in Idaho; top 37% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	34.1	50.3	45.8	top 7% in Idaho; top 22% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	—	41.0	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 3.98, RN 0.61, weekend 3.50.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.98 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.

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: 3/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Cascades at Desert View. 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 →

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Cascades at Desert View LLC	Organization	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	—	01/01/2023
Desert View Holdings of Buhl, LLC	Organization	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	—	01/01/2023
Moore, Thomas	Individual	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	10%	01/01/2023
Takayama FLP	Organization	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	23%	01/01/2023
Tower Bridge FLP	Organization	5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest	23%	01/01/2023
Bentzler, Lori	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	11/01/2018
Bentzler, Lori	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	07/25/2025
Cascades at Desert View LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	03/27/2025
Crump, Jason	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2023
Crump, Jason	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2023
Desert View Holdings of Buhl, LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2023
Eelir FLP	Organization	General Partnership Interest	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2023
Fullmer, Chad	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2023
Fullmer, Chad	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2023
Kirei Kazoku, LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2023
Marshall, Samantha	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	11/01/2018
Marshall, Samantha	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	07/25/2025
McSpadden, Darin	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2023
McSpadden, Darin	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2023
Moore, Thomas	Individual	Corporate Director	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2023

Showing 20 of 33 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 13 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.

Other facilities in the same chain

CMS lists this facility under the chain Cascades Healthcare — 19 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.

Lincoln County Care Center — Shoshone, ID · overall 3/5
Mini-Cassia Care Center — Burley, ID · overall 2/5
Oak Creek Rehabilitation Center of Kimberly — Kimberly, ID · overall 1/5abuse
Sunny Ridge — Nampa, ID · overall 3/5
Galveston Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Galveston, TX · overall 1/5SFF
Port Arthur Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Port Arthur, TX · overall 2/5abuse
Sabine Heights Nursing and Rehabilitation Center — Port Arthur, TX · overall 1/5abuse
Cascades at Orchard Park — Orem, UT · overall 4/5

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 18 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

"Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
"Walk me through what happens when a resident or family files a grievance — who responds and how fast?"
"How many hours a day is a registered nurse physically in the building, including weekends?"
"Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
"What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
"Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
"Who runs your activities program, what are their qualifications, and can I see this week's activity calendar?"
"How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"

Also worth asking anywhere

"Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Idaho midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
"Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
"CMS reports 34% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
"The ownership record on file lists 33 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
"CMS lists this facility under its Special Focus program — what is being done differently, and by when?"
"Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

Facility	Distance	City	Overall	Inspection
Serenity Transitional Care	13.2 mi	Twin Falls, ID	★★★☆☆	2/5
Bridgeview Estates	14.7 mi	Twin Falls, ID	★★★☆☆	2/5
Twin Falls Transitional Care of Cascadia	15.9 mi	Twin Falls, ID	★★★★★	4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Twin Falls, ID — 5 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.

Oak Creek Rehabilitation Center of Kimberly — Kimberly, ID · overall 1/5abuse

Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.

All facilities in Buhl →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 135089.