16300 East Keith McMahan Drive, Fountain Hills, AZ 85268 (opens Google Maps) · Maricopa County · (480) 836-4800· 64 certified beds · avg 58 residents/day · certified since Nov 26, 2001 · 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 ENSIGN GROUP (342 facilities, chain avg rating 3.2★)
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 22, 2026 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.
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: May 18, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 17 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint F-0755
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
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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 29, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0755 |
| Apr 22, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Feb 18, 2026 | 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 19, 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. · from a complaint · F-0761 |
| May 30, 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 |
| Mar 6, 2024 | 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 |
| Jan 25, 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 |
| Jan 25, 2024 | 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 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · F-0725 |
| Oct 20, 2022 | 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 |
| 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 did not have working policies to ensure employees report any suspected crime against a resident on time, to post notices of employees' reporting rights, and to prevent retaliation against staff who report. · F-0608 |
| Oct 20, 2022 | 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. · F-0610 |
| 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 |
| Oct 20, 2022 | 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. · F-0695 |
| Oct 20, 2022 | 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 |
| Oct 20, 2022 | 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. · F-0919 |
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 1).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 9 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 2 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 3 | 1 | G ▲ |
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 →
1 fine totaling $13,065.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 22, 2026 | Fine | $13,065 |
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) | 2.99 | 3.97 | 3.95 | bottom 7% in Arizona; bottom 14% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.84 | 0.69 | 0.69 | top 24% in Arizona; top 25% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.66 | 3.50 | 3.50 | bottom 10% in Arizona; bottom 15% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.28 | 0.49 | 0.48 | bottom 18% in Arizona; bottom 27% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 35.4 | 45.2 | 45.8 | top 20% in Arizona; top 25% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 20.0 | 43.6 | 42.9 | top 13% in Arizona; top 13% 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 3.16, RN 0.88, weekend 2.81.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.16 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Fountain Hills Post Acute. 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 →
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dark Sky Holdings LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 100% | 10/01/2022 |
| Burnam, Soon | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2022 |
| Burnam, Soon | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2022 |
| Dark Sky Holdings LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2022 |
| Ensign Services INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2022 |
| Keetch, Chad | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2011 |
| Monks, Conner | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2022 |
| Monks, Conner | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2022 |
| Monks, Conner | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2022 |
| Prabhakaran, Vinay | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2022 |
| Prabhakaran, Vinay | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2022 |
| Prabhakaran, Vinay | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2022 |
| Standard Bearer Healthcare Op, LP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2022 |
| The Ensign Group INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2022 |
All 14 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
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.
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.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shea Post Acute Rehabilitation Center | 8.8 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Life Care Center of Scottsdale | 8.8 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Advance Health Care of Scottsdale | 8.9 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Sante of North Scottsdale | 9.0 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| VI at Grayhawk, a VI and Plaza Companies Community | 11.7 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| VI at Silverstone, a VI and Plaza Companies Commun | 12.7 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Alta Mesa Health and Rehabilitation | 12.9 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Advanced Healthcare of Mesa | 13.4 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Montecito Post Acute Care and Rehabilitation | 13.4 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Desert Blossom Health & Rehab Center | 13.5 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Sandridge Post Acute | 13.6 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Mi Casa Nursing Center | 13.8 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
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.
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 035260.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details