51 South 48th Street, Mesa, AZ 85206 (opens Google Maps) · Maricopa County · (949) 487-9500· 222 certified beds · avg 202 residents/day · certified since Sep 17, 1986 · 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 →
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: 4/5 · 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 · May 20, 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): 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: Jun 13, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 18 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
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
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 4, 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 |
| May 20, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Feb 14, 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. · F-0725 |
| Feb 14, 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. · F-0677 |
| Feb 14, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Nov 22, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Nov 22, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0757 |
| Aug 18, 2023 | 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 |
| Aug 18, 2023 | 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. · F-0684 |
| Jul 1, 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 |
| Jul 1, 2022 | 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 |
| Jul 1, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Jul 1, 2022 | 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 |
| Jul 1, 2022 | 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 |
| Jul 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0625 |
| Jul 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Jul 1, 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 |
| Jul 1, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · F-0693 |
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 3).
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 |
| 2023 | 4 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 5 | 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 $8,278.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 20, 2025 | Fine | $8,278 |
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) | 3.26 | 3.97 | 3.95 | bottom 21% in Arizona; bottom 25% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.95 | 0.69 | 0.69 | top 16% in Arizona; top 18% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.70 | 3.50 | 3.50 | bottom 11% in Arizona; bottom 16% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.82 | 0.49 | 0.48 | top 12% in Arizona; top 11% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 34.2 | 45.2 | 45.8 | top 16% in Arizona; top 22% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 17.6 | 43.6 | 42.9 | top 11% in Arizona; top 11% 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 4.21, RN 1.23, weekend 3.48.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.21 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Montecito Post Acute Care and Rehabilitation. 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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bobba, Dheeraj | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2015 |
| Bobba, Dheeraj | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2015 |
| Bobba, Dheeraj | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2015 |
| Burnam, Soon | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2006 |
| Cooper, Karl | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2018 |
| Cooper, Karl | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2018 |
| Cooper, Karl | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2018 |
| Ensign Services INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2003 |
| Keetch, Chad | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2011 |
| Peterson, Forrest | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2019 |
| Port, Barry | Individual | Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/29/2025 |
All 11 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Citadel Post Acute | 0.7 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Desert Blossom Health & Rehab Center | 1.1 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Advanced Healthcare of Mesa | 1.2 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Alta Mesa Health and Rehabilitation | 1.3 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Mi Casa Nursing Center | 1.8 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Citrus Heights Respiratory and Rehabilitation | 1.8 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Mission Palms Post Acute | 2.3 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Sante of Mesa | 2.5 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Springdale Village Post Acute | 3.5 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Sandridge Post Acute | 6.5 mi | Mesa, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Wellsprings of Gilbert | 8.6 mi | Gilbert, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Friendship Village of Tempe | 8.8 mi | Tempe, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 4/5 |
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 035135.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details