How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Friendship Village of Tempe
2525 East Southern Avenue, Tempe, AZ 85282 (opens Google Maps) · Maricopa County · (480) 831-3184· 128 certified beds · avg 57 residents/day · certified since Nov 12, 1980 · 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: LIFE CARE SERVICES (43 facilities, chain avg rating 4.1★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 1, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
—
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: ★★★★☆4/5 · 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.
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 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 protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint F-0842
The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint F-0607
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 1, 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 |
| Apr 1, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 20, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint · F-0607 |
| Mar 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 |
| Mar 6, 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 |
| Mar 6, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint · F-0607 |
| Mar 6, 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 |
| Mar 6, 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. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Jan 17, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0677 |
| Jan 17, 2025 | 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 |
| Jan 17, 2025 | 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 |
| Jan 17, 2025 | 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. · F-0880 |
| Jan 17, 2025 | 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. · F-0550 |
| Jan 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. · F-0609 |
| Jan 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. · F-0610 |
| Jan 17, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0623 |
| Jan 17, 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. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Jan 17, 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 |
| Jan 17, 2025 | 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. · F-0842 |
| Oct 6, 2023 | 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. · F-0732 |
| Oct 6, 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 |
Inspection trend by year
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 19
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 2 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 19 | 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: Not reported
Arizona average: 3.97
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: Not reported
Arizona average: 0.69
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: Not reported
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) | — | 3.97 | 3.95 | — |
| Registered Nurse hours | — | 0.69 | 0.69 | — |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | — | 3.50 | 3.50 | — |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | — | 0.49 | 0.48 | — |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 46.6 | 45.2 | 45.8 | bottom 47% in Arizona; bottom 46% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 41.0 | 43.6 | 42.9 | top 43% in Arizona; top 49% 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 —, RN —, weekend —.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (— here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 1/5.
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: 3/5 · 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 Friendship Village of Tempe. 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 →
Non profit - Other
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tempe Life Care Village INC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 09/04/2012 |
| Camberg, Kevin | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Cassano, Donald | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/02/1983 |
| Combs, Suzanne | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2018 |
| Combs, Suzanne | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/23/2025 |
| Crawford, Cathlene | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/08/2021 |
| Foster, Shelley | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2022 |
| Garba, Emily | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2026 |
| Garba, Emily | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/07/2026 |
| Jensen, Darrell | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2017 |
| Jensen, Darrell | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Life Care Services LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/1980 |
| Life Care Services LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/02/2025 |
| Marvin, Cole | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2007 |
| Pearson, Todd | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2020 |
| Pearson, Todd | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2024 |
| Pulsifer, Marc | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/06/2009 |
| Pulsifer, Marc | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2019 |
| Reck, Ross | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/02/2016 |
| Reck, Ross | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2019 |
Showing 20 of 23 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 3 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 Life Care Services — 43 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.
- Casa de Las Campanas — San Diego, CA · overall 2/5
- Health Care Ctr at the Forum at Rancho San Antonio — Cupertino, CA · overall 4/5
- Avalon Health Care Center at Stoneridge — Mystic, CT · overall 5/5
- Essex Meadows Health Center — Essex, CT · overall 5/5
- Oakton Place Health and Rehabilitation at the Arli — Naples, FL · overall 2/5
- Premier Place at the Glenview — Naples, FL · overall 5/5
- Waters Edge Health and Rehabilitation — Palm City, FL · overall 5/5
- Oaks Health Ctr at the Marshes of Skidaway Island — Savannah, GA · overall 4/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 42 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.
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
- "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
- "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
- "How often is each resident's medication list reviewed, and who decides when a drug can be reduced or stopped?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 47% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 23 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 54 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tempe Post Acute | 3.4 mi | Tempe, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| River Park Post Acute | 3.4 mi | Chandler, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Sandridge Post Acute | 3.7 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Mirabella at Asu | 4.0 mi | Tempe, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Plaza Healthcare | 5.0 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Rehab at Scottsdale Village Square | 6.5 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | —/5 | abuseSFF | |
| Desert Cove Nursing Center | 6.5 mi | Chandler, AZ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Chandler Post Acute and Rehabilitation | 6.6 mi | Chandler, AZ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Haven of Scottsdale | 6.8 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Osborn Health and Rehabilitation | 6.8 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Heritage Court Post Acute of Scottsdale | 6.9 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Sante of Chandler | 7.0 mi | Chandler, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
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.
- Haven Health Sky Harbor, LLC — Phoenix, AZ · overall 2/5
- Haven of Phoenix — Phoenix, AZ · overall 3/5abuse
- Horizon Post Acute and Rehabilitation Center — Glendale, AZ · overall 3/5abuse
- Immanuel Campus of Care — Peoria, AZ · overall 3/5abuse
- Lake Pleasant Post Acute Rehabilitation Center — Peoria, AZ · overall 4/5
- Life Care Center of North Glendale — Glendale, AZ · overall 5/5
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 035074.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).