UtahTooele

Rocky Mountain Care - Willow Springs

85 East 2000 North, Tooele, UT 84074 · Tooele County · 112 certified beds · avg 108 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1982

Part of chain: ROCKY MOUNTAIN CARE (10 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
5
Serious findings on record
$40,892
Fines, last 3 years
3.63
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5

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 self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jun 17, 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Jun 17, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Aug 1, 2024 · F-0760 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.

Why it matters: A serious medication error can cause real harm, hospitalization, or worse.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Aug 30, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Oct 18, 2021 · F-0689

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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Dec 1, 2021 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Oct 18, 2021 · 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Dec 1, 2021 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Oct 18, 2021 · F-0757

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.

Why it matters: Unneeded drugs expose residents to side effects, drowsiness, falls, and dangerous interactions.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Dec 1, 2021 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (32)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Mar 31, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Mar 31, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Mar 31, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Jun 17, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Jun 17, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 17, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 17, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Jun 17, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep complete, dated laboratory records in residents' files.
Jun 17, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards.
Aug 1, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint
Aug 1, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Aug 1, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Aug 21, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not serve meals and snacks at times that fit residents' needs, preferences, and requests, or did not offer nourishing alternatives for residents who want to eat outside scheduled meal times.
Aug 21, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Aug 21, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Aug 21, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 21, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Aug 21, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Oct 18, 2021▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Oct 18, 2021▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Oct 18, 2021▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe 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.
Oct 18, 2021F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service.
Oct 18, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Oct 18, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Oct 18, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Oct 18, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Oct 18, 2021E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not report COVID-19 data to residents and their families as required. Facilities must keep residents and families informed about COVID-19 cases.
Oct 18, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Oct 18, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered.
Oct 18, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition.
Oct 18, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Oct 18, 2021D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (6 → 6).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2021143G ▲
202360F
202431G ▲
202561G ▲
202630D

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)

2 fines totaling $40,892.

DateTypeAmount / length
Jun 17, 2025Fine$9,269
Aug 1, 2024Fine$31,623

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

MeasureThis facilityUtah avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.633.873.95top 47% in Utah; bottom 43% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.651.170.69bottom 10% in Utah; top 41% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.203.393.50top 40% in Utah; bottom 42% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.380.880.48bottom 4% in Utah; bottom 48% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)54.350.745.8bottom 38% in Utah; bottom 26% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)52.440.642.9bottom 33% in Utah; bottom 32% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, 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 3.63, RN 0.65, weekend 3.20. Staffing rating: 3/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5

Who owns this facility

Non profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Beaver City CorporationOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%08/01/2015
Bangerte, NathanIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2025
Bangerter, EdwardIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2025
Bangerter, JohnathanIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2025
Barney, JanettIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012
Beeman, RaymondIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE09/22/2022
Biddulph, GlenIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2025
Biddulph, GlenIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2025
Boardman, LauraIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE09/22/2022
Brown, GaryIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2011
Darby, MeganIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2025
Gatherum, JasonIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2025
Hale, FredrickIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE09/22/2022
Hansen, KentIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2025
Langford, ScottIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2018
Mikesell, BradleyIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE09/22/2022
Moss, TylerIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2018
Neves, CourtneyIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2025
Oakden, RichardIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2010
Ottley, BrettIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/13/2025

Questions to ask on your visit

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

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Copper Ridge Health Care16.9 miWest Jordan, UT★★★☆☆2/5
Meadow Peak Rehabilitation17.2 miTaylorsville, UT★★★☆☆3/5
Rocky Mountain Care - Riverton17.6 miRiverton, UT★★★★☆3/5
Legacy Village Rehabilitation18.3 miTaylorsville, UT★★☆☆☆3/5
Rocky Mountain Care - Hunter Hollow18.7 miWest Valley City, UT★★☆☆☆1/5
Stonehenge of South Jordan19.4 miSouth Jordan, UT★★★★★5/5
Neurorestorative19.4 miRiverton, UT★★★★☆3/5
Monument Healthcare Taylorsville19.5 miSalt Lake City, UT★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Tooele →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 465089.