How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Mi Casa Nursing Center
330 South Pinnule Circle, Mesa, AZ 85206 (opens Google Maps) · Maricopa County · (480) 981-0687· 180 certified beds · avg 99 residents/day · certified since Nov 27, 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 →
Abuse citation flag (CMS)
Part of chain: LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA (194 facilities, chain avg rating 3.4★)
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.
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 4, 2025
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.80
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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · 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 25 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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 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 25 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 18, 2026 | 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 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 |
| Jan 9, 2026 | 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 |
| Sep 5, 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 |
| Apr 4, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690 |
| Apr 4, 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 |
| Apr 4, 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 |
| Apr 4, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. · F-0561 |
| Apr 4, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 4, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide or arrange specialized rehabilitation services — such as physical, occupational, or speech therapy — for residents who needed them. · F-0825 |
| Jan 30, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0725 |
| Jan 3, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0725 |
| Jan 3, 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. · from a complaint · F-0550 |
| Jan 3, 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 |
| Jan 3, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0677 |
| Jun 5, 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 |
| Jun 5, 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 |
| Jun 8, 2023 | 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 20, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 20, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686 |
| Apr 20, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 20, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have doctor's orders in place for a resident's immediate care at the time the resident was admitted. · F-0635 |
| Apr 20, 2022 | 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 20, 2022 | 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 |
| Apr 20, 2022 | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (1 → 6).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 3
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 7 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 2 | 0 | D |
| 2025 | 12 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 3 | 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)
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: 3.80
Arizona average: 3.97
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.77
Arizona average: 0.69
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.41
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) | 3.80 | 3.97 | 3.95 | top 43% in Arizona; top 48% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.77 | 0.69 | 0.69 | top 29% in Arizona; top 30% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.41 | 3.50 | 3.50 | top 38% in Arizona; top 47% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.75 | 0.49 | 0.48 | top 16% in Arizona; top 13% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 51.3 | 45.2 | 45.8 | bottom 29% in Arizona; bottom 34% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 33.3 | 43.6 | 42.9 | top 25% in Arizona; top 33% 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 3.84, RN 0.78, weekend 3.45.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.84 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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: 4/5 · 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 Mi Casa Nursing Center. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Developers Investment Company INC | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/1993 |
| Butner, Nancy | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/16/2018 |
| Butner, Nancy | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/16/2018 |
| Cross, Cindy | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/21/1994 |
| Developers Investment Company INC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/1993 |
| Fletcher, Todd | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/13/2024 |
| Henry, Terry | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/16/1999 |
| Jean-Baptiste, Ronald | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/15/2025 |
| Jean-Baptiste, Ronald | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/15/2025 |
| Jean-Baptiste, Ronald | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/16/2025 |
| Lay, Lisa | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/09/2018 |
| Life Care Affiliates II | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/1993 |
| Life Care Affiliates II | Organization | General Partnership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/1993 |
| Life Care Affiliates II | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/30/2009 |
| Life Care Centers of America, INC. | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/1988 |
| Life Care Centers of America, INC. | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/27/2025 |
| Majercin, Donna | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/05/2021 |
| Majercin, Donna | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/05/2021 |
| Mesa United Medical Investors Limited Partnership | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/1988 |
| Mesa United Medical Investors Limited Partnership | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/30/2009 |
Showing 20 of 28 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 8 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 Centers of America — 194 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.
- Payson Care Center — Payson, AZ · overall 2/5
- Berkley Manor Care Center — Denver, CO · overall 5/5
- Briarwood Health Care Center — Denver, CO · overall 5/5
- Canon Lodge Care Center — Canon City, CO · overall 2/5abuse
- Columbine Manor Care Center — Salida, CO · overall 5/5
- Evergreen Nursing Home — Alamosa, CO · overall 2/5abuse
- Garden Terrace Alzheimer's Center of Excellence — Aurora, CO · overall 4/5
- Hallmark Nursing Center — Denver, CO · overall 5/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 193 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.
- "What specific steps do you take to prevent abuse and neglect, and how are staff trained on them?"
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
- "How do you care for residents with incontinence or catheters, and what do you do to prevent urinary tract infections?"
- "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?"
- "What choices do residents have over their daily schedule, like meal times, bathing, and activities?"
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 51% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 28 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 36 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mission Palms Post Acute | 0.6 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Desert Blossom Health & Rehab Center | 0.6 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Advanced Healthcare of Mesa | 0.7 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Alta Mesa Health and Rehabilitation | 1.0 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Citadel Post Acute | 1.2 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Springdale Village Post Acute | 1.7 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Montecito Post Acute Care and Rehabilitation | 1.8 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Sante of Mesa | 2.5 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Citrus Heights Respiratory and Rehabilitation | 3.5 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Apache Junction Health Center | 7.6 mi | Apache Junction, AZ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Sandridge Post Acute | 8.3 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Wellsprings of Gilbert | 8.7 mi | Gilbert, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 |
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.
- Mirabella at Asu — Tempe, AZ · overall 3/5
- North Mountain Medical and Rehabilitation Center — Phoenix, AZ · overall 5/5
- Northpark Health and Rehabilitation of Cascadia — Phoenix, AZ · overall 3/5
- Osborn Health and Rehabilitation — Scottsdale, AZ · overall 5/5
- Palm Valley Post Acute — Goodyear, AZ · overall 2/5SFF
- Peoria Post Acute and Rehabilitation — Peoria, AZ · overall 4/5
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 035120.