How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Sante of North Scottsdale
17490 North 93rd Street, Scottsdale, AZ 85255 (opens Google Maps) · Maricopa County · (480) 588-5386· 72 certified beds · avg 68 residents/day · certified since Mar 20, 2012 · Medicare only — not Medicaid certified
Certified for Medicare only. Medicare pays for short rehabilitation stays, not for long-term care — and this facility cannot bill Medicaid, which is what most families rely on for a long stay. Ask what a long-term stay here would cost and how it would be paid for. Who pays for nursing home care →
Part of chain: SANTE (5 facilities, chain avg rating 4.4★)
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Sep 13, 2024
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.89
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
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: 3/5 · 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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 18 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
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
View all 18 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.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 8, 2025 | 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 |
| Dec 5, 2024 | 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 |
| Dec 5, 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 |
| Oct 24, 2024 | 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 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | 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 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552 |
| Sep 13, 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. · F-0576 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | 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 |
| Sep 13, 2024 | 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 24, 2023 | 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 |
| Jul 8, 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 |
| Jul 8, 2022 | 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 |
| Jul 8, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Jul 8, 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 |
| Jul 8, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal 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. · F-0760 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (1 → 8).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 5 | 0 | E |
| 2023 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 11 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 1 | 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.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityArizona averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 4.89
Arizona average: 3.97
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.15
Arizona average: 0.69
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.25
Arizona average: 3.50
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Arizona avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.89 | 3.97 | 3.95 | top 15% in Arizona; top 15% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.15 | 0.69 | 0.69 | top 10% in Arizona; top 11% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.25 | 3.50 | 3.50 | top 17% in Arizona; top 17% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.93 | 0.49 | 0.48 | top 7% in Arizona; top 7% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 58.4 | 45.2 | 45.8 | bottom 15% in Arizona; bottom 19% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 80.0 | 43.6 | 42.9 | bottom 4% in Arizona; bottom 6% 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 5.19, RN 1.22, weekend 4.52.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.19 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Sante of North Scottsdale. 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 →
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gallow, Marsha | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/10/2012 |
| Hansen, Charles | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 11/24/2010 |
| Kayhan, Ashley | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/10/2012 |
| Leach Family Revocable Trust Dated 2/25/24 | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 12/06/2022 |
| Mickeleit Family Revocable Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 01/01/2021 |
| Munch Family Irrevocable Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 05/01/2011 |
| Munch Tooke, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/10/2012 |
| Munch, Michael | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 11/24/2010 |
| RDW Arizona LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/10/2012 |
| Sante Ab LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 05/01/2015 |
| Sante P4 LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 01/01/2015 |
| Sante P5 LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 05/01/2016 |
| Sante Scottsdale LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 11/24/2010 |
| Schaefer, Jacob | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 03/29/2011 |
| Short, Jacqueline | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 01/01/2022 |
| Short, Sterling | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 01/01/2022 |
| SP Re Scottsdale LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/10/2012 |
| SP TRC Scottsdale LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/10/2012 |
| Sterling & Jacqueline Holdings,llc | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 01/01/2022 |
| Tooke, Arthur | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 05/01/2011 |
Showing 20 of 47 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 27 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 Sante — 5 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.
- Sante of Surprise — Surprise, AZ · overall 4/5
- Northwoods Lodge — Silverdale, WA · overall 5/5
- Sante of Chandler — Chandler, AZ · overall 5/5
- Sante of Mesa — Mesa, AZ · overall 5/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking.
Questions to ask on your visit
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?"
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "If someone reports suspected abuse or neglect here, what happens in the first 24 hours?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "How often is each resident's medication list reviewed, and who decides when a drug can be reduced or stopped?"
- "What is your approach to psychiatric medications — how do you try non-drug options first and work to reduce doses over time?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "How do you explain health changes and treatment options to residents and their families?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 58% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 47 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 (12 closest of 47 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VI at Grayhawk, a VI and Plaza Companies Community | 2.9 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Shea Post Acute Rehabilitation Center | 4.0 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Life Care Center of Scottsdale | 4.2 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| VI at Silverstone, a VI and Plaza Companies Commun | 4.6 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Advance Health Care of Scottsdale | 4.7 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Phoenix Mountain Post Acute | 6.3 mi | Phoenix, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Life Care Center of Paradise Valley | 6.9 mi | Phoenix, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Ridgecrest Post Acute | 6.9 mi | Phoenix, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Arizona State Veteran Home-Phx | 7.7 mi | Phoenix, AZ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Acacia Health Center | 8.0 mi | Phoenix, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Fountain Hills Post Acute | 9.0 mi | Fountain Hills, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Heritage Court Post Acute of Scottsdale | 11.1 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Maricopa, AZ — 77 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Sante of Surprise — Surprise, AZ · overall 4/5
- South Mountain Post Acute — Phoenix, AZ · overall 4/5
- Springdale Village Post Acute — Mesa, AZ · overall 3/5
- Sun City Post Acute — Sun City, AZ · overall 4/5
- Sun Health Grandview Care Center — Sun City West, AZ · overall 5/5
- Sun Health la Loma Care Center — Litchfield Park, AZ · overall 3/5
- Sun West Choice Healthcare & Rehab — Sun City West, AZ · overall 5/5
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 035286.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).