Arizona ›Prescott Valley

Prescott Valley Nursing & Rehabilitation

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

3380 North Windsong Drive, Prescott Valley, AZ 86314 (opens Google Maps) · Yavapai County · (928) 775-0045· 58 certified beds · avg 74 residents/day · certified since Oct 14, 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 →

Abuse citation flag (CMS)

What the abuse flag means →

Part of chain: OPCO SKILLED MANAGEMENT (66 facilities, chain avg rating 2.3★)

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 Nov 10, 2023
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Jul 11, 2025
$8,278
Fines, last 3 years
2.78
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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · how star ratings work →

⚠ The most recent standard health inspection was more than 2 years ago — conditions may have changed.

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)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jul 11, 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: Aug 8, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 33 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not let a resident or their legal representative see or buy copies of the resident's own records. · from a complaint F-0573

  2. 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

  3. 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

View all 33 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 11, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not let a resident or their legal representative see or buy copies of the resident's own records. · from a complaint · F-0573
Jun 11, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0684
Aug 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
Aug 19, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 19, 2025D · 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
Jul 11, 2025▲ G · Actual 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
Jul 11, 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. · from a complaint · F-0684
Mar 25, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0655
Nov 10, 2023E · 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
Nov 10, 2023D · 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
Nov 10, 2023D · 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
Sep 9, 2022E · 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 9, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · F-0602
Sep 9, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have working policies to ensure employees report any suspected crime against a resident on time, to post notices of employees' reporting rights, and to prevent retaliation against staff who report. · F-0608
Sep 9, 2022D · 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
Sep 9, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 9, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 9, 2022D · 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
Sep 9, 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
Sep 9, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756
Sep 9, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 9, 2022D · 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
Sep 9, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not perform required COVID-19 testing on residents and staff. · F-0886
Apr 2, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Apr 2, 2021D · 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
Apr 2, 2021D · 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
Apr 2, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way. · F-0637
Apr 2, 2021D · 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
Apr 2, 2021D · 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
Apr 2, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 2, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 2, 2021D · 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
Apr 2, 2021B · Potential for minimal harm, patternThe 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (12 → 3).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2022
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 1
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
2021100E
2022120E
202330E
202561G ▲
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 $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.

DateTypeAmount / length
Jul 11, 2025Fine$8,278

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 facilityArizona averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 2.78
Arizona average: 3.97
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.31
Arizona average: 0.69
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 2.35
Arizona average: 3.50
U.S. average: 3.50

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

MeasureThis facilityArizona avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)2.783.973.95bottom 3% in Arizona; bottom 8% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.310.690.69bottom 7% in Arizona; bottom 11% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing2.353.503.50bottom 2% in Arizona; bottom 6% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.200.490.48bottom 9% in Arizona; bottom 12% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)59.345.245.8bottom 12% in Arizona; bottom 17% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)50.043.642.9bottom 39% in Arizona; bottom 39% 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 2.95, RN 0.33, weekend 2.49.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (2.95 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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Prescott Valley Nursing & Rehabilitation. 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 - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Amethyst Az TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest33%11/20/2024
Az Healthcare LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%11/20/2024
First Sweetzer Holdings LLCOrganizationIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE11/20/2024
Garetz, DavidIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE11/20/2024
Hatteras Investments, LLCOrganizationIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE11/20/2024
Indigo Az TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest61%11/20/2024
Kaplan, EstherIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE11/20/2024
Kaplan, MoshaIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE11/20/2024
Sasem Investments LLCOrganizationIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE11/20/2024
3380 N Windsong Drive Az LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/07/2025
Az Realty Holdings LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2024
Continuum Rehab Group LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/20/2024
Garetz, DavidIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE11/20/2024
Garetz, DavidIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/20/2024
Garland, ThomasIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/20/2024
Garland, ThomasIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/20/2024
Gurwitz, SolomonIndividualIndividual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/22/2025
Guthmiller, TrevorIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/20/2024
Guthmiller, TrevorIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/20/2024
Hansen Hunter LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/20/2024

Showing 20 of 29 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 9 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 Opco Skilled Management — 66 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 65 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?"
  • "If I ask for a copy of my family member's records, how quickly will I get them and what does it cost?"
  • "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
  • "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
  • "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?"
  • "What does the care plan for a brand-new resident cover in the first 48 hours, and who writes it?"
  • "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Arizona 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 59% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 29 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 (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Mountain View Manor7.4 miPrescott, AZ★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Granite Creek Health & Rehabilitation Center8.3 miPrescott, AZ★★☆☆☆2/5
Prescott Village Nursing & Rehabilitation8.3 miPrescott, AZ★★☆☆☆1/5abuse
Haven Health Prescott, LLC9.5 miPrescott, AZ★★★★☆4/5
Haven of Cottonwood19.8 miCottonwood, AZ★★☆☆☆1/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Yavapai, AZ — 7 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 Prescott Valley →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 035244.

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