Nevada ›Sparks

Wingfield Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Cente

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

2350 Wingfield Hills Rd, Sparks, NV 89436 (opens Google Maps) · Washoe County · (775) 335-8275· 120 certified beds · avg 116 residents/day · certified since Mar 3, 2010 · 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 →

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Feb 12, 2026
3
Serious findings on record
most recent Dec 14, 2023
$75,670
Fines, last 3 years
3.64
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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: 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.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Dec 14, 2023 · F-0686

The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.

Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.

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: Jan 26, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Nov 15, 2023 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.

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: Nov 15, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Nov 15, 2023 · 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: Nov 15, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 42 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not provide proper care for residents with a colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy — surgical openings in the abdomen that let waste leave the body into a pouch. These require regular, skilled attention to stay clean and healthy. F-0691

View all 42 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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Feb 12, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Feb 12, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 12, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide proper care for residents with a colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy — surgical openings in the abdomen that let waste leave the body into a pouch. These require regular, skilled attention to stay clean and healthy. · F-0691
Feb 12, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Feb 12, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · F-0693
Feb 12, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 12, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 12, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 12, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921
Feb 12, 2026C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · F-0732
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 27, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 27, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 27, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 27, 2024B · Potential for minimal harm, patternThe facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · from a complaint · F-0623
Dec 14, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686
Dec 14, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · F-0727
Dec 14, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 14, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 14, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
Dec 14, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 14, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 14, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Dec 14, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Dec 14, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 14, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697
Dec 14, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 14, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 14, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806
Dec 14, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status. · F-0887
Dec 14, 2023C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
Nov 15, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Nov 15, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Nov 15, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint · F-0602
Nov 15, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (8 → 10).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 20
Serious citations (G–L): 3
2024
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2023203G ▲
2024120D
2026100E

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

1 fine totaling $75,670.

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.

DateTypeAmount / length
Dec 14, 2023Fine$75,670

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

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityNevada averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.64
Nevada average: 4.05
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.87
Nevada average: 0.98
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.09
Nevada average: 3.61
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityNevada avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.644.053.95bottom 40% in Nevada; bottom 44% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.870.980.69top 46% in Nevada; top 22% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.093.613.50bottom 25% in Nevada; bottom 36% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.670.870.48bottom 49% in Nevada; top 18% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)45.345.145.8bottom 49% in Nevada; bottom 49% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)36.843.442.9top 38% in Nevada; top 41% 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 3.02, RN 0.72, weekend 2.57.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.02 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Wingfield Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Cente. 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 / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Gray Estate Holdings LLCOrganizationDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2022
Gray, ChelseyIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2022
Gray, ZacharyIndividualDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2022
Asl Realty LLCOrganization5% or Greater Mortgage InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2022
Asl Realty LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2022
Gray Estate Holdings LLCOrganization5% or Greater Mortgage InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2022
Gray Estate Holdings LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2022
Gray, ChelseyIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2022
Gray, ChelseyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2022
Gray, ChelseyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2022
Gray, ZacharyIndividual5% or Greater Mortgage InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2022
Gray, ZacharyIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2022
Gray, ZacharyIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2022
Gray, ZacharyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2022
Gray, ZacharyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2022
Ilyas, IrtqaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2024
Ilyas, IrtqaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2023
Lebowitz, AndrewIndividual5% or Greater Mortgage InterestNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2022
Modina, KaitlynIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE08/02/2022
Modina, KaitlynIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/02/2022

Showing 20 of 30 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 10 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

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

  • "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
  • "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
  • "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
  • "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
  • "Which staff are trained in ostomy care, and how often is that care provided and checked?"
  • "How do you monitor residents' weight and eating, and what happens when someone starts losing weight?"
  • "How do you decide when a feeding tube is truly needed, and how do staff care for residents who have one?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Nevada midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 45% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 30 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 (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Hearthstone Health and Rehabilitation3.7 miSparks, NV★☆☆☆☆1/5
Northern Nevada State Veterans Home4.6 miSparks, NV★★★★☆2/5abuse
Rosewood Rehabilitation Center6.0 miReno, NV★☆☆☆☆1/5
Advanced Health Care of Reno7.8 miReno, NV★★★★★4/5
Caremeridian LLC, DBA Neurorestorative7.8 miReno, NV★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Alpine Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Center10.0 miReno, NV★★☆☆☆2/5
Alta Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Center10.7 miReno, NV★★☆☆☆2/5
Life Care Center of Reno12.3 miReno, NV★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Sparks →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 295088.

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details