How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Chandler Post Acute and Rehabilitation
2121 West Elgin Street, Chandler, AZ 85224 (opens Google Maps) · Maricopa County · (480) 899-6717· 120 certified beds · avg 106 residents/day · certified since Jan 24, 1985 · 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 →
Part of chain: THE ENSIGN GROUP (342 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Dec 7, 2023
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.83
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: 4/5 · how star ratings work →
⚠ The most recent standard health inspection was more than 2 years ago — conditions may have changed.
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 21 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
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
View all 21 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 12, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Dec 12, 2025 | 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 |
| Nov 20, 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 |
| Nov 20, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Nov 20, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610 |
| Nov 17, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Nov 17, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610 |
| Nov 1, 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. · from a complaint · F-0658 |
| Apr 2, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Dec 7, 2023 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Oct 17, 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. · from a complaint · F-0880 |
| Oct 20, 2022 | 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 |
| Oct 20, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0578 |
| Oct 20, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · F-0580 |
| Oct 20, 2022 | 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 |
| Oct 20, 2022 | 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 |
| Oct 20, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Jun 17, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jun 17, 2021 | 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 |
| Jun 17, 2021 | 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 |
| Jun 17, 2021 | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2022
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 7
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 4 | 0 | E |
| 2022 | 6 | 0 | D |
| 2023 | 2 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 2 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 7 | 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.
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: 3.83
Arizona average: 3.97
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.81
Arizona average: 0.69
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.18
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) | 3.83 | 3.97 | 3.95 | top 41% in Arizona; top 47% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.81 | 0.69 | 0.69 | top 27% in Arizona; top 27% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.18 | 3.50 | 3.50 | bottom 44% in Arizona; bottom 41% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.46 | 0.49 | 0.48 | top 40% in Arizona; top 37% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 43.7 | 45.2 | 45.8 | top 42% in Arizona; top 46% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 47.6 | 43.6 | 42.9 | bottom 40% in Arizona; bottom 40% 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 3.75, RN 0.79, weekend 3.11.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.75 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.
Quality measures rating: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Chandler Post Acute and Rehabilitation. 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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Burnam, Soon | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/15/2014 |
| Ensign Services INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2015 |
| Jones, Brett | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2015 |
| Jones, Brett | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2015 |
| Jones, Brett | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/22/2025 |
| Keetch, Chad | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2011 |
| Monks, Chandler | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2024 |
| Peterson, Forrest | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2019 |
| Port, Barry | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/26/2018 |
| Sato, Ami | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/09/2024 |
| Uy, Marietta | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/09/2016 |
| Uy, Marietta | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/09/2016 |
| Uy, Marietta | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/09/2016 |
All 13 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 The Ensign Group — 342 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.
- Citadel Post Acute — Mesa, AZ · overall 5/5
- Citrus Heights Respiratory and Rehabilitation — Mesa, AZ · overall 3/5
- Coronado Healthcare Center — Phoenix, AZ · overall 5/5
- Desert Blossom Health & Rehab Center — Mesa, AZ · overall 5/5
- Desert Terrace Healthcare Center — Phoenix, AZ · overall 3/5abuse
- Estrella Health and Rehabilitation Center — Avondale, AZ · overall 4/5
- Fountain Hills Post Acute — Fountain Hills, AZ · overall 3/5
- Granite Creek Health & Rehabilitation Center — Prescott, AZ · overall 2/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 341 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Can you show me the call buttons in the bathrooms and bathing areas, and tell me your average response time when one is pressed?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
- "If someone reports suspected abuse or neglect here, what happens in the first 24 hours?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "If my family member is able to manage their own medications, would you allow it, and how is that decided?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Arizona 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 44% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 13 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 40 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sante of Chandler | 0.4 mi | Chandler, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Archstone Care Center | 0.4 mi | Chandler, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Desert Cove Nursing Center | 0.6 mi | Chandler, AZ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| River Park Post Acute | 3.3 mi | Chandler, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Tempe Post Acute | 5.6 mi | Tempe, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Ahwatukee Post Acute | 6.4 mi | Phoenix, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Friendship Village of Tempe | 6.6 mi | Tempe, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 | |
| Wellsprings of Gilbert | 7.5 mi | Gilbert, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| The Center at Val Vista, LLC | 7.6 mi | Gilbert, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Mirabella at Asu | 9.3 mi | Tempe, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Sandridge Post Acute | 9.8 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Citrus Heights Respiratory and Rehabilitation | 10.3 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Maricopa, AZ — 77 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Christian Care Nursing Center — Phoenix, AZ · overall 4/5
- Citadel Post Acute — Mesa, AZ · overall 5/5
- Coronado Healthcare Center — Phoenix, AZ · overall 5/5
- Desert Blossom Health & Rehab Center — Mesa, AZ · overall 5/5
- Desert Haven Care Center — Phoenix, AZ · overall 1/5abuse
- Desert Peak Care Center — Phoenix, AZ · overall 1/5abuse
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 035101.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).