How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
22605 North 74th Street, Scottsdale, AZ 85255 (opens Google Maps) · Maricopa County · (480) 478-6200· 24 certified beds · avg 20 residents/day · certified since Jun 9, 2011 · 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: VI LIVING (9 facilities, chain avg rating 4.4★)
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 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.
Showing the latest 3 of 17 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
The facility did not develop, carry out, or maintain an effective training program for all new and existing staff members. F-0940
The facility did not educate its staff on residents' rights and the facility's responsibilities toward residents. Staff can only respect rights they've been taught about. F-0942
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 28, 2026 | 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 |
| May 28, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not develop, carry out, or maintain an effective training program for all new and existing staff members. · F-0940 |
| May 28, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not educate its staff on residents' rights and the facility's responsibilities toward residents. Staff can only respect rights they've been taught about. · F-0942 |
| May 28, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not train its staff on dementia care and on recognizing and reporting abuse, neglect, and exploitation. · F-0943 |
| May 28, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not include required infection control training — with written standards, policies, and procedures — as part of its infection prevention program. · F-0945 |
| May 28, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide its staff with required training on behavioral health — caring for residents with conditions like dementia, depression, or other mental health needs. · F-0949 |
| May 28, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| May 28, 2026 | 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 |
| May 28, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal 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. · F-0677 |
| May 28, 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. · F-0684 |
| May 28, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide or arrange specialized rehabilitation services — such as physical, occupational, or speech therapy — for residents who needed them. · F-0825 |
| May 28, 2026 | 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 |
| Mar 13, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 13, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. · F-0640 |
| Mar 13, 2025 | 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 |
| Nov 29, 2023 | 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 |
| Aug 2, 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 |
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 12).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 2 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 3 | 0 | E |
| 2026 | 12 | 0 | E |
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 →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 6.35 | 3.97 | 3.95 | top 6% in Arizona; top 3% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 2.15 | 0.69 | 0.69 | top 2% in Arizona; top 1% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 5.38 | 3.50 | 3.50 | top 7% in Arizona; top 4% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 1.74 | 0.49 | 0.48 | top 2% in Arizona; top 1% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 25.0 | 45.2 | 45.8 | top 8% in Arizona; top 7% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 9.1 | 43.6 | 42.9 | top 3% in Arizona; top 3% 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 5.95, RN 2.02, weekend 5.04.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.95 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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: 4/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for VI at Silverstone, a VI and Plaza Companies Commun. 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 →
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cc-Development Group, INC. | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 03/01/2011 |
| Cc-Silverstone, INC | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2011 |
| Margot and Tom Pritzker Foundation | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 10% | 05/22/2025 |
| P. G. - Daniel Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 01/01/2012 |
| P. G. - Don #3 Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 01/01/2012 |
| P. G. - Jim Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 01/01/2012 |
| P. G. - Johnny Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 01/01/2012 |
| P. G. - Karen Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 01/01/2012 |
| P. G. - Linda Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 01/01/2012 |
| P. G. - Nicholas Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 01/01/2012 |
| P. G. - Tony Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 01/01/2012 |
| Pritzker Pucker Family Foundation No. 2 | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 05/22/2025 |
| Classic Residence Management Limited Partnership | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2011 |
| Classic Residence Management Limited Partnership | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/03/2025 |
| Cope, Tara | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2018 |
| Evraets, Melissa | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2020 |
| Evraets, Melissa | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2020 |
| Gonzalez, Luis | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/05/2011 |
| Gonzalez, Luis | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/05/2011 |
| Koszylko, Tomek | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/15/2018 |
Showing 20 of 33 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 13 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
CMS lists this facility under the chain VI Living — 9 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.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VI at Grayhawk, a VI and Plaza Companies Community | 2.3 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Sante of North Scottsdale | 4.6 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Acacia Health Center | 5.3 mi | Phoenix, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Life Care Center of Paradise Valley | 6.3 mi | Phoenix, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Ridgecrest Post Acute | 6.4 mi | Phoenix, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Phoenix Mountain Post Acute | 7.4 mi | Phoenix, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Shea Post Acute Rehabilitation Center | 8.3 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Life Care Center of Scottsdale | 8.5 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Advance Health Care of Scottsdale | 9.0 mi | Scottsdale, AZ | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Arizona State Veteran Home-Phx | 9.3 mi | Phoenix, AZ | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| North Mountain Medical and Rehabilitation Center | 12.6 mi | Phoenix, AZ | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Fountain Hills Post Acute | 12.7 mi | Fountain Hills, AZ | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
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.
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 035281.
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