Utah ›Salt Lake City

Millcreek Rehabilitation and Nursing

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

3520 South Highland Drive, Salt Lake City, UT 84106 (opens Google Maps) · Salt Lake County · (801) 484-7638· 61 certified beds · avg 58 residents/day · certified since Apr 4, 2016 · 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)

What the abuse flag means →

Part of chain: BEAVER VALLEY HOSPITAL (5 facilities, chain avg rating 2.2★)

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.

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Mar 31, 2025
3
Serious findings on record
most recent Mar 31, 2025
$25,441
Fines, last 3 years
2.27
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Mar 31, 2025 · F-0610 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: When allegations aren't investigated, harm to residents can continue unchecked.

Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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: Apr 11, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Mar 31, 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 (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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: Apr 11, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 31, 2025 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.

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: Apr 11, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 29 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. J · Immediate jeopardy, 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

View all 29 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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Apr 7, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 7, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 31, 2025▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe 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
Mar 31, 2025▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe 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
Mar 31, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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 31, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 31, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · F-0656
Mar 31, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not keep complete, dated laboratory records in residents' files. · F-0775
Mar 31, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Mar 31, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Mar 31, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not have firmly secured handrails on both sides of its hallways. · F-0924
Mar 31, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0561
Mar 31, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Mar 31, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs. · F-0770
Mar 31, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems. · F-0805
Jun 15, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676
Jun 15, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 30, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Sep 30, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not fully assess residents on time — a complete assessment of health, abilities, and needs is required when a resident is first admitted and at least once every 12 months after that. · F-0636
Sep 30, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition. · F-0638
Sep 30, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676
Sep 30, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759
Sep 30, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Sep 30, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Sep 30, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Sep 30, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760
Sep 30, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not prepare and serve food in a form that meets each resident's individual needs — for example, chopped, pureed, or softened food for residents with chewing or swallowing problems. · F-0805
Sep 30, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide or arrange specialized rehabilitation services — such as physical, occupational, or speech therapy — for residents who needed them. · F-0825
Sep 30, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not bring in qualified outside professionals to provide a required service when it didn't have a qualified professional on staff. · F-0840

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 13).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 13
Serious citations (G–L): 3
2026
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2021120E
202320D
2025133J ▲
202620D

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

1 fine totaling $25,441.

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.

DateTypeAmount / length
Mar 31, 2025Fine$25,441

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityUtah averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 2.27
Utah average: 3.87
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.70
Utah average: 1.17
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 1.97
Utah average: 3.39
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityUtah avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)2.273.873.95bottom 2% in Utah; bottom 2% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.701.170.69bottom 13% in Utah; top 37% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing1.973.393.50bottom 2% in Utah; bottom 2% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.490.880.48bottom 12% in Utah; top 34% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)52.450.745.8bottom 44% in Utah; bottom 31% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)30.840.642.9top 37% in Utah; top 30% 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 2.25, RN 0.69, weekend 1.95.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (2.25 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.

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

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Millcreek Rehabilitation and Nursing. 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 →

Government - City/county

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Clark, BrendanIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/03/2025
Clark, BrendanIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/03/2025
Cottonwood Healthcare LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/10/2016
Cottonwood Healthcare LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/03/2025
Langford, ScottIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2017
Millcreek Rehabilitation and Nursing LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/11/2025
Millcreek Rehabilitation and Nursing LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/11/2025
Myers, KatieIndividualIndividual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/11/2025
Myers, WalterIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/04/2016
Stubbs, RachaelIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/03/2025
Stubbs, RachaelIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/03/2025
Swain, HollyIndividualIndividual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/11/2025
Swain, JaredIndividualIndividual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE07/11/2025

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 Beaver Valley Hospital — 5 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.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

  • "If someone reports suspected abuse or neglect here, what happens in the first 24 hours?"
  • "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?"
  • "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
  • "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
  • "How are lab results filed and reviewed, and how quickly does the doctor see abnormal results?"
  • "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Utah 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 52% 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 37 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Mt. Olympus Rehabilitation Center1.3 miSalt Lake City, UT★★☆☆☆1/5
Meadow Brook Rehabilitation and Nursing1.6 miSalt Lake City, UT★★☆☆☆1/5abuse
Monument Healthcare South Salt Lake1.6 miSalt Lake City, UT★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
Monument Healthcare Murray Creek1.9 miMillcreek, UT★★☆☆☆1/5abuse
St Joseph Villa2.0 miSalt Lake City, UT★★★☆☆3/5
Little Cottonwood Rehabilitation and Nursing2.1 miSouth Salt Lake, UT★★★★★5/5
Monument Healthcare Canyon Rim2.2 miMillcreek, UT★★★☆☆3/5
Highland Care Center2.3 miHolladay, UT★★★★★4/5
Paramount Health and Rehabilitation2.4 miSalt Lake City, UT★★★☆☆2/5
Monument Healthcare Millcreek2.6 miSalt Lake City, UT★★★★☆3/5
Spring Creek Healthcare Center3.0 miSalt Lake City, UT★★☆☆☆2/5
Monument Healthcare Cottonwood Creek3.0 miSalt Lake City, UT★★★☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Salt Lake, UT — 35 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.

All facilities in Salt Lake City →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 465185.

This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details