1481 East 1450 South, Clearfield, UT 84015 (opens Google Maps) · Davis County · (801) 728-4300· 168 certified beds · avg 121 residents/day · certified since Mar 2, 1981 · 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: ROCKY MOUNTAIN CARE (10 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)
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 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.
▲ Actual harm, pattern · May 14, 2026 · F-0725 · triggered by a complaint
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.
Why it matters: Understaffing means longer waits for help, missed care, and higher risk of falls and other harm.
Severity (H): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 14, 2026 · F-0550 · triggered by a complaint
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.
Why it matters: Being treated without dignity harms a resident's self-worth, mental health, and overall quality of life.
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 14, 2026 · F-0677 · triggered by a complaint
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.
Why it matters: Residents who don't get this help can suffer poor hygiene, skin breakdown, weight loss, and a loss of dignity.
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 14, 2026 · F-0688 · triggered by a complaint
The 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.
Why it matters: Without this care, residents can develop stiff, contracted joints and lose the ability to move on their own.
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 17, 2024 · F-0687 · triggered by a complaint
The 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.
Why it matters: Neglected feet can develop painful sores and infections, especially dangerous for residents with diabetes.
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 15, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 17, 2024 · 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 15, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 52 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
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
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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 14, 2026 | ▲ H · Actual 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 |
| May 14, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| May 14, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| May 14, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The 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. · from a complaint · F-0688 |
| May 14, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0880 |
| May 14, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · from a complaint · F-0676 |
| Mar 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · from a complaint · F-0580 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The 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. · from a complaint · F-0687 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | ▲ 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 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · from a complaint · F-0676 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0677 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not make sure residents actually saw their doctor face-to-face at all required visits. Doctors must examine nursing home residents in person on a regular schedule. · from a complaint · F-0712 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0761 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0812 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | 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 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · from a complaint · F-0867 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · from a complaint · F-0883 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have enough fresh-air ventilation, whether through windows, mechanical systems, or both. · from a complaint · F-0923 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to share a room with their spouse or a roommate of their choosing, or moved residents to a different room without written notice beforehand. · from a complaint · F-0559 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents reasonable access to and privacy in using ways to communicate, such as phones, mail, and email. Residents have the right to stay in touch with the outside world privately. · from a complaint · F-0576 |
| Apr 17, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0578 |
| Aug 9, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Aug 9, 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 |
| Aug 9, 2022 | 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 |
| Aug 9, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867 |
| Aug 9, 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 |
| Aug 9, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657 |
| Aug 9, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658 |
| Aug 9, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695 |
| Aug 9, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697 |
| Aug 9, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Aug 9, 2022 | 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 |
| Aug 9, 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 |
| Aug 9, 2022 | 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 |
| Aug 9, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide special eating equipment and utensils — like adaptive cups or easy-grip silverware — for residents who need them, along with appropriate help at meals. · F-0810 |
| Aug 9, 2022 | 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. · F-0842 |
| Feb 10, 2020 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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 |
| Feb 10, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. · F-0554 |
| Feb 10, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Feb 10, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly. · F-0585 |
| Feb 10, 2020 | 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 |
| Feb 10, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Feb 10, 2020 | 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. · F-0689 |
| Feb 10, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726 |
| Feb 10, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Feb 10, 2020 | 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 |
| Feb 10, 2020 | 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 |
| Feb 10, 2020 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (15 → 18).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 12 | 0 | E |
| 2022 | 15 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 18 | 2 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 6 | 4 | H ▲ |
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 $58,637.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 17, 2024 | Fine | $58,637 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Utah avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 2.93 | 3.87 | 3.95 | bottom 10% in Utah; bottom 12% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.89 | 1.17 | 0.69 | bottom 36% in Utah; top 22% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.70 | 3.39 | 3.50 | bottom 17% in Utah; bottom 16% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.95 | 0.88 | 0.48 | top 31% in Utah; top 7% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 64.1 | 50.7 | 45.8 | bottom 20% in Utah; bottom 11% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 38.9 | 40.6 | 42.9 | top 47% in Utah; top 45% 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 3.53, RN 1.07, weekend 3.25.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.53 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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 Rocky Mountain Care- Clearfield. 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 →
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beaver City Corporation | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 02/24/2014 |
| Rmce Operations LLC | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/15/2026 |
| Bangerte, Nathan | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2025 |
| Bangerter, Edward | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2025 |
| Bangerter, Johnathan | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2025 |
| Barney, Janett | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2012 |
| Bccu, INC - Clearfield | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/28/2025 |
| Beeman, Raymond | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/22/2022 |
| Biddulph, Glen | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2024 |
| Biddulph, Glen | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2024 |
| Boardman, Laura | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/22/2022 |
| Brown, Gary | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2011 |
| Darby, Megan | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2025 |
| Gatherum, Jason | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2025 |
| Hale, Fredrick | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/22/2022 |
| Hansen, Kent | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2025 |
| Langford, Scott | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2018 |
| Mikesell, Bradley | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/22/2022 |
| Moss, Tyler | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2018 |
| Neves, Courtney | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2025 |
Showing 20 of 34 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 14 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
CMS lists this facility under the chain Rocky Mountain Care — 10 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 9 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thatcher Brook Rehabilitation & Care Center | 1.3 mi | Clearfield, UT | ★★★★★ | 3/5 | |
| Fairfield Village Rehabilitation | 2.8 mi | Layton, UT | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Pine View Transitional Rehab | 5.1 mi | South Ogden, UT | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| The Terrace Transitional | 5.3 mi | Ogden, UT | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Mt Ogden Health and Rehabilitation Center | 5.4 mi | Washington Terrace, UT | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Mountain View Health Services | 5.4 mi | Ogden, UT | —/5 | SFF | |
| Heritage Park Healthcare and Rehabilitation | 5.4 mi | Roy, UT | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| South Ogden Post-Acute (cascades at South Ogden) | 5.4 mi | Ogden, UT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Stonehenge of Ogden | 6.3 mi | Washington Terrace, UT | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Crestwood Rehabilitation and Nursing | 7.6 mi | Ogden, UT | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Harrison Pointe Healthcare and Rehabilitation | 7.9 mi | Ogden, UT | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Lomond Peak Nursing and Rehabilitation, LLC | 12.5 mi | Ogden, UT | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Davis, UT — 6 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 465067.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details