Utah ›Salt Lake City

Monument Healthcare South Salt Lake

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

2472 South 300 East, Salt Lake City, UT 84115 (opens Google Maps) · Salt Lake County · (801) 466-2211· 140 certified beds · avg 102 residents/day · certified since May 6, 1997 · 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 →

SFF Candidate

What Special Focus status means →

Part of chain: MONUMENT HEALTH GROUP (11 facilities, chain avg rating 2.8★)

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jun 19, 2025
9
Serious findings on record
most recent Jun 19, 2025
$36,546
Fines, last 3 years
3.11
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: 1/5 · 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, widespread · Jun 19, 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 (L): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was widespread: a systemic or pervasive problem. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Jun 30, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Jun 19, 2025 · F-0921

The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.

Why it matters: An unsafe or unclean environment raises the risk of falls, infections, and daily discomfort for residents.

Severity (K): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Jun 30, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jun 19, 2025 · F-0742

The facility did not provide appropriate treatment and services to residents with a mental health condition, difficulty adjusting emotionally, or a history of trauma or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Why it matters: Residents with mental health needs who go untreated can suffer worsening symptoms, distress, and isolation.

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 30, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jan 25, 2024 · F-0686 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.

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: Feb 15, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 21, 2022 · F-0600

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: May 6, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 21, 2022 · F-0684

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 6, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 21, 2022 · F-0686

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.

Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.

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 6, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 21, 2022 · F-0697

The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.

Why it matters: Untreated pain causes needless suffering and can lead to depression, poor sleep, and declining health.

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 6, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 21, 2022 · F-0867

The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them.

Why it matters: Without a working quality program, the same care problems tend to repeat instead of getting fixed.

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 6, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 57 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. L · Immediate jeopardy, widespread

    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

  2. K · Immediate jeopardy, pattern

    The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. F-0921

  3. G · Actual harm, isolated

    The facility did not provide appropriate treatment and services to residents with a mental health condition, difficulty adjusting emotionally, or a history of trauma or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). F-0742

View all 57 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
Jun 19, 2025▲ L · Immediate jeopardy, widespreadThe 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
Jun 19, 2025▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, patternThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921
Jun 19, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide appropriate treatment and services to residents with a mental health condition, difficulty adjusting emotionally, or a history of trauma or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). · F-0742
Jun 19, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not provide timely, quality laboratory tests to meet residents' needs. · F-0770
Jun 19, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jun 19, 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. · F-0609
Jun 19, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jun 19, 2025E · 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
Jun 19, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal 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
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · F-0628
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
Jun 19, 2025D · 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 19, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755
Jun 19, 2025D · 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
Jun 19, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Jun 19, 2025D · 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
Jan 25, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0686
Jan 25, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jan 25, 2024E · 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
Jan 25, 2024D · 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. · F-0609
Jan 25, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 25, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 25, 2024D · 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
Jan 25, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 25, 2024D · 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
Mar 21, 2022▲ 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. · F-0600
Mar 21, 2022▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Mar 21, 2022▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 21, 2022▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697
Mar 21, 2022▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867
Mar 21, 2022F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
Mar 21, 2022F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies. · F-0838
Mar 21, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Mar 21, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Mar 21, 2022E · 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
Mar 21, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · F-0607
Mar 21, 2022E · 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. · F-0609
Mar 21, 2022E · 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 21, 2022E · 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
Mar 21, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Mar 21, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Mar 21, 2022E · 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 21, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 21, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 21, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 21, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 21, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. · F-0687
Mar 21, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · F-0688
Mar 21, 2022D · 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
Mar 21, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 21, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881
Mar 21, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883
Mar 21, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility's bedrooms did not give residents visual privacy — such as curtains or dividers — when privacy is needed. · F-0914

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (9 → 20).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 28
Serious citations (G–L): 5
2024
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2025
All citations: 20
Serious citations (G–L): 3

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2022285G ▲
202491G ▲
2025203L ▲

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 →

2 fines totaling $36,546.

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
Jun 19, 2025Fine$18,155
Jan 25, 2024Fine$18,391

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: 3.11
Utah average: 3.87
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.16
Utah average: 1.17
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.65
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)3.113.873.95bottom 19% in Utah; bottom 18% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.161.170.69top 40% in Utah; top 10% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing2.653.393.50bottom 12% in Utah; bottom 14% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.970.880.48top 30% in Utah; top 6% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)47.250.745.8top 42% in Utah; bottom 44% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)45.240.642.9bottom 42% in Utah; bottom 43% 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 3.72, RN 1.39, weekend 3.18.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.72 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Monument Healthcare South Salt Lake. 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 - Hospital district

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Gunnison Valley HospitalOrganizationDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2020
Clawson, TravisIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2025
Clawson, TravisIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2025
Fragoso, LindsayIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2025
Fragoso, LindsayIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2025
Galindo, MichaelIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2025
Galindo, MichaelIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2025
Gunnison Valley HospitalOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2020
Gunnison Valley HospitalOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/11/2025
Health Group Management LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2025
Health Group Management LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/04/2025
Lock, ChelseaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2025
Lock, ChelseaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2025
Marriott, StephenIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2025
Marriott, StephenIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2025
Monument Health Group LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2025
Monument Health Group LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2025
Monument Health Properties LLCOrganization5% or Greater Mortgage InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2025
Monument Health Properties LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2025
Monument Real Estate South Salt Lake LLCOrganization5% or Greater Mortgage InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/07/2025

Showing 20 of 33 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 13 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 Monument Health Group — 11 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 10 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

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.

  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "Can we tour the whole building today, including resident bathrooms and common areas, not just the lobby?"
  • "What mental health services do you offer on-site, and how do you care for residents with depression, anxiety, or a history of trauma?"
  • "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
  • "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
  • "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
  • "How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
  • "How does your quality committee work, and can you give an example of a problem it recently identified and fixed?"

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 47% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 33 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
  • "CMS lists this facility under its Special Focus program — what is being done differently, and by when?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 37 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Meadow Brook Rehabilitation and Nursing0.3 miSalt Lake City, UT★★☆☆☆1/5abuse
St Joseph Villa0.8 miSalt Lake City, UT★★★☆☆3/5
Little Cottonwood Rehabilitation and Nursing1.1 miSouth Salt Lake, UT★★★★★5/5
Millcreek Rehabilitation and Nursing1.6 miSalt Lake City, UT★★☆☆☆1/5abuse
Monument Healthcare Murray Creek2.1 miMillcreek, UT★★☆☆☆1/5abuse
Paramount Health and Rehabilitation2.3 miSalt Lake City, UT★★★☆☆2/5
Mt. Olympus Rehabilitation Center2.9 miSalt Lake City, UT★★☆☆☆1/5
Maple Ridge Rehabilitation and Nursing3.0 miSalt Lake City, UT★☆☆☆☆2/5abuse
Pine Creek Rehabilitation and Nursing3.0 miSalt Lake City, UT★★★☆☆2/5abuse
Monument Healthcare Millcreek3.1 miSalt Lake City, UT★★★★☆3/5
Alpine Meadow Rehabilitation and Nursing3.1 miWest Valley City, UT★★★☆☆2/5
City Creek Post Acute3.2 miSalt Lake City, UT★★★☆☆3/5

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 465146.

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