Devon Gables Rehabilitation Center
6150 East Grant Road, Tucson, AZ 85712 · Pima County · 312 certified beds · avg 183 residents/day · certified since Nov 8, 1987
Abuse citation flag (CMS)
Part of chain: ATIED ASSOCIATES (12 facilities, chain avg rating 1.8★)
The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5
⚠ 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 self-reported quality measures.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jun 10, 2025 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Jun 25, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)
All citations in the current public record (21)
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| May 19, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Jun 26, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint |
| Jun 10, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint |
| Oct 25, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Oct 25, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint |
| Jul 14, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. |
| Apr 29, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Apr 29, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Apr 29, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Apr 29, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Apr 29, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Apr 29, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Apr 29, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. |
| Dec 12, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Dec 12, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Dec 12, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Dec 12, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Dec 12, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Dec 12, 2019 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Dec 12, 2019 | B · Minimal risk, repeated | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 1).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 7 | 0 | D |
| 2022 | 7 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 1 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 2 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 3 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 1 | 0 | D |
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)
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | Arizona avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.05 | 3.97 | 3.95 | top 32% in Arizona; top 37% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.57 | 0.69 | 0.69 | bottom 43% in Arizona; bottom 48% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.73 | 3.50 | 3.50 | top 27% in Arizona; top 32% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.45 | 0.49 | 0.48 | top 43% in Arizona; top 39% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 28.2 | 45.2 | 45.8 | top 11% in Arizona; top 11% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 30.4 | 43.6 | 42.9 | top 21% in Arizona; top 30% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day, 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 3.64, RN 0.51, weekend 3.35. Staffing rating: 4/5.
Self-reported quality measures
Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.
Quality measures rating: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rothner, Daniel | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 7% | 03/06/2012 |
| Rothner, Melissa | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 7% | 03/06/2012 |
| Rothner, Rachel | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 7% | 03/06/2012 |
| Rothner, William | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 40% | 03/06/2012 |
| Friebus, Heather | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2012 |
| Rothner, William | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/06/2012 |
| Zimmerman, Joe | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2012 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
- "What do you do daily to keep residents moving, and how do you help residents at risk of losing mobility?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "Before any service that isn't covered by Medicare or Medicaid, how will you notify us and get our agreement?"
- "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?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sandstone Estates Rehab Centre | 0.2 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Sabino Canyon Rehabilitation & Care Center | 0.8 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Pueblo Springs Rehabilitation Center | 0.8 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Handmaker Home for the Aging | 1.2 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Foothills Rehabilitation Center | 1.2 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Haven of Saguaro Valley | 1.8 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| The Center at Tucson | 1.8 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Santa Rosa Care Center | 1.8 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Villa Maria Post Acute and Rehabilitation | 2.3 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Haven of Tucson | 2.4 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Catalina Post Acute and Rehabilitation | 5.3 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Park Avenue Health and Rehabilitation Center | 5.8 mi | Tucson, AZ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 035145.