Public Google reviewers rate this highly and often mention responsive management and communication. Schedule a visit to confirm the fit.
based on 10 Google reviews
Email Arizona Desert Falls to yourself
Get a one-time email with a link to this profile so it is easy to find and share later.
This sends one email and does not add you to a mailing list.
Public Google reviewers rate Arizona Desert Falls highly. Reviewers highlight: responsive management and communication, high-quality food and dining. Reviewer identity is not verified, and online reviews may not capture everything. Schedule a visit to assess the fit directly.
Families considering Arizona Desert Falls may find peace of mind in the facility's ability to manage complex medical needs and provide a sense of safety for residents. While several reviewers praise the quality of the food and the responsiveness of management, one highly critical review alleges serious issues regarding cleanliness and theft.
Quality Themes
Tap a score for detailsStrengths
Concerns
Rating Trends
Tap a year to see what changed
Distribution · 10 analyzed
This facility responds to some reviews.
Personalized based on this facility's data
Key Review Excerpts
“They handle her day to day, sometimes under difficult circumstances. I can leave and know she is in good hands.”
“The management is very responsive to communication and we appreciate everything they do for her.”
“My cousin is living here and has nothing but good things to say about the food, staff and director.”
Source: AZ State Licensing Agency
The following deficiencies were found during the on-site compliance inspection and investigation of complaint 00104495 and 00129263 conducted on May 5, 2025.
Based on record review and interview, the manager failed to ensure a written service plan was completed no later than 14 calendar days after the resident's date of acceptance, for one of five residents sampled. The deficient practice posed a risk as there was no service plan to direct the services to be provided to a resident. Findings include: 1. A review of R3's medical record revealed the initial service plan dated April 17, 2025 was not signed by a nurse or medical practitioner as of May 5, 2025. The service plan indicated that R3's medications were provided by the facility staff. 2. In an interview, E1 revealed that R3 was not approved for insurance and did not have a medical practitioner assigned to the resident. E1 acknowledged that R3 did not have a signed service plan as required.
Based on record review and interview, the manager failed to ensure that the emergency responder was provided written documentation upon arrival as required under Arizona Revised Statute (A.R.S.) 36-420.04. Findings include: 1. A record review of form used by the facility revealed that R1, R2, R3, R4, nor R5 had prefilled Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Face Sheet readily available. 2. In an interview, E1 revealed that the employees filled out the EMS sheet while on the phone with 911. E1 completed the EMS Transfer Checklist for all residents during the inspection process. E1 acknowledged that there was no prefilled EMS Face Sheet/Assist Transfer Checklist available for any of the residents.
Based on record review, documentation review, and interview, the manager failed to ensure that an employee and/or resident provided documentation of freedom from infectious Tuberculosis (TB) as specified in R9-10-113, for four sampled residents and two of five sampled employees. The deficient practice posed a potential TB exposure risk to residents. Findings include: 1. A record review of R1, R2, R3, and R4's medical records revealed that there was no TB screening assessment for any of the sampled residents. 2. A record review of R4 and R5's personnel record revealed that neither completed a TB screening assessment. 3. A documentation review of the facility's Policies and Procedure titled, "Tuberculosis (TB) Control" describes " Tuberculosis Baseline Screening" requirements for all new hires and residents. The policy required new hires to complete the form at the time of hire and residents to complete at the time of admission. 4. In an interview, E1 acknowledged that three residents and two employees did not meet the TB screening and assessment requirements, nor the two-step TB requirements for employees.
No deficiencies were found during the on-site compliance inspection and investigation of complaints AZ00194444, AZ00202911, AZ00208299, AZ00209188, AZ00209406, AZ00209557, and AZ00209681 conducted on April 29, 2024. Based on this deficiency-free compliance inspection, the Department shall not conduct a compliance inspection for twenty-four months, according to A.R.S. \'a7 36-425(E). Subsection (E) does not prohibit the Department from enforcing licensing requirements as authorized by A.R.S. \'a7 36-424.
Contact this facility directly and verify the details that matter most to your family.
EveryPlace is a research directory. Facility information is compiled from public sources — Medicare.gov, state licensing portals, Google Places, and publicly available street-level imagery. Some summaries, interpretations, suggested questions, and pricing research are AI-generated or AI-assisted and may contain errors or omit important context. Listings do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, or advertisement, and we do not accept payment for placement. Families should verify all details directly with the facility and the original sources linked above before making any care decisions. See our Research Policy for our editorial standards, correction process, and image-removal policy.
Proactive Home Care
< 1 miAssisted Living · Phoenix, AZ
Sunshine Village
< 1 miAssisted Living · Phoenix, AZ
King Assisted Living II
< 1 miAssisted Living · Phoenix, AZ
Md Care Homes, LLC
< 1 miAssisted Living · Phoenix, AZ
King Assisted Living
< 1 miAssisted Living · Phoenix, AZ
North Valley Care Home
1.2 miAssisted Living · Phoenix, AZ