85 East 2000 North, Tooele, UT 84074 (opens Google Maps) · Tooele County · (435) 843-2000· 112 certified beds · avg 108 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1982 · 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: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · how star ratings work →
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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 17, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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 30, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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: Dec 1, 2021 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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: Dec 1, 2021 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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: Dec 1, 2021 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 32 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The 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
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
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
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 31, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Mar 31, 2026 | 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 |
| Mar 31, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Jun 17, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Jun 17, 2025 | 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 |
| Jun 17, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Jun 17, 2025 | 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 |
| Jun 17, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep complete, dated laboratory records in residents' files. · F-0775 |
| Jun 17, 2025 | 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 |
| Aug 1, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0760 |
| Aug 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Aug 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Aug 21, 2023 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The 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. · F-0809 |
| Aug 21, 2023 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812 |
| Aug 21, 2023 | 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 21, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Aug 21, 2023 | 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 21, 2023 | 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 |
| Oct 18, 2021 | ▲ 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. · F-0689 |
| Oct 18, 2021 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697 |
| Oct 18, 2021 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Oct 18, 2021 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. · F-0801 |
| Oct 18, 2021 | 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 |
| Oct 18, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Oct 18, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Oct 18, 2021 | 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 |
| Oct 18, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0885 |
| Oct 18, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal 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. · F-0550 |
| Oct 18, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0582 |
| Oct 18, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0638 |
| Oct 18, 2021 | 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. · F-0676 |
| Oct 18, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (6 → 6).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 14 | 3 | G ▲ |
| 2023 | 6 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 3 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 6 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 3 | 0 | D |
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 →
2 fines totaling $40,892.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2025 | Fine | $9,269 |
| Aug 1, 2024 | Fine | $31,623 |
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) | 3.63 | 3.87 | 3.95 | top 47% in Utah; bottom 43% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.65 | 1.17 | 0.69 | bottom 10% in Utah; top 41% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.20 | 3.39 | 3.50 | top 40% in Utah; bottom 42% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.38 | 0.88 | 0.48 | bottom 4% in Utah; bottom 48% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 54.3 | 50.7 | 45.8 | bottom 38% in Utah; bottom 26% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 52.4 | 40.6 | 42.9 | bottom 33% in Utah; bottom 32% 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 3.63, RN 0.65, weekend 3.20.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.63 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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 - Willow Springs. 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% | 08/01/2015 |
| 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 |
| Beeman, Raymond | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/22/2022 |
| Biddulph, Glen | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2025 |
| Biddulph, Glen | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2025 |
| 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 |
| Oakden, Richard | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2010 |
| Ottley, Brett | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/13/2025 |
Showing 20 of 32 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 12 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Copper Ridge Health Care | 16.9 mi | West Jordan, UT | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Meadow Peak Rehabilitation | 17.2 mi | Taylorsville, UT | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Rocky Mountain Care - Riverton | 17.6 mi | Riverton, UT | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Legacy Village Rehabilitation | 18.3 mi | Taylorsville, UT | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Rocky Mountain Care - Hunter Hollow | 18.7 mi | West Valley City, UT | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Stonehenge of South Jordan | 19.4 mi | South Jordan, UT | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Neurorestorative | 19.4 mi | Riverton, UT | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Monument Healthcare Taylorsville | 19.5 mi | Salt Lake City, UT | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 465089.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details