Public Google reviewers rate this highly and often mention compassionate and family-like care. Schedule a visit to confirm the fit.
based on 9 Google reviews
Email Desert Haven Home Care 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 Desert Haven Home Care highly. Reviewers highlight: compassionate and family-like care, expertise in managing challenging behaviors. Reviewer identity is not verified, and online reviews may not capture everything. Schedule a visit to assess the fit directly.
Families can expect a deeply compassionate environment where staff treat residents like members of their own family. Reviewers consistently praise the facility for its high standards of care, particularly during end-of-life or rehabilitation periods, and note the staff's ability to handle challenging situations with expertise.
Quality Themes
Tap a score for detailsStrengths
Rating Trends
Tap a year to see what changed
Distribution · 9 analyzed
This facility actively engages with reviewer feedback.
Personalized based on this facility's data
Key Review Excerpts
“They cared for my brother as if he were part of their own family. They truly care for everyone there and I do not think you could find a better home for your loved one in the Phoenix area.”
“All of the staff and the owner are so kind and compassionate. I never have to worry about my mom. She is clean, well fed, and very well taken care of.”
“The manager, Tammie and staff including Jesse, Elisabeth and Marisol personally came to my home to offer their condolences.”
Source: AZ State Licensing Agency
No deficiencies were found during the on-site investigation of complaint 00137324 conducted on August 5, 2025
No deficiencies were found during the on-site investigation of complaint 00135635 conducted on July 21, 2025.
The following deficiencies were found during the on-site compliance inspection conducted on October 3, 2024:
Based on observation and interview, the manager failed to ensure poisonous or toxic material was stored in a locked area and inaccessible to residents. The deficient practice posed a risk to the physical health and safety of a resident. Findings include: 1. During a facility tour, the Compliance Officer observed a bottle of Lysol spray disinfectant inside the common bathroom used by residents. 2. In an interview, E1 and E2 acknowledged poisonous or toxic material was not stored in a locked area and inaccessible to residents. This is a repeat deficiency from the compliance inspection conducted May 8, 2023.
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the manager failed to ensure a bell, intercom, or other mechanical means to alert employees to a resident's needs or emergencies was available and accessible in a bedroom being used by a resident receiving personal care services. The deficient practice posed a risk to the physical health and safety of a resident. Findings include: 1. During the facility tour with E1, the Compliance Officer observed R4's bedroom did not have a bell, intercom, or other mechanical means to alert employees to a resident's needs or emergencies accessible to a resident. 2. Review of R4's medical record revealed R4 received personal care services. 3. During an interview with R4, R4 stated R4's roommate lost a bell so R4 gave R4's bell to R4's roommate. R4 also stated R4 will either yell to get attention of the caregivers or go out and find a caregiver for assistance. 4. In an interview, E1 acknowledged that a bell, intercom, or other mechanical means to alert employees to a resident's needs or emergencies was not available and accessible in a bedroom being used by a resident receiving personal care services.
An on-site investigation of complaint AZ00198238 was conducted on July 24, 2023 and the following deficiencies were cited:
Based on documentation review and interview, the manager failed to ensure as part of the policies and procedures required in R9-10-803(C)(1)(h), a plan was established and documented to ensure the manager or a caregiver was available as back-up to provide assisted living services to a resident if the manager or a caregiver assigned to work was not available or not able to provide the required assisted living services. Findings include: 1. A review of the facility's policies and procedures revealed a policy titled "STAFFING POLICY". The policy stated: "Attendance and Punctuality Employees are expected to report to work on time and as scheduled. If, for any reason, you are unable to report for work at your scheduled time, you are expected to notify your manager as far in advance as possible so that arrangements can be made to cover your responsibilities..." However, the policy did not include a plan to ensure the manager or a caregiver was available as back-up to provide assisted living services to a resident if the manager or a caregiver assigned to work was not available or not able to provide the required assisted living services. 2. In an interview, E1 reported E1 would be available to work as back-up to provided assisted living services. E1 acknowledged this plan was not documented as part of the aforementioned policy.
Based on record review and interview, the manager failed to ensure a personnel record for each employee or volunteer included all requirements in subsection (C)(1), for one of three employees sampled. Findings include: 1. A review of E3's personnel record revealed an application for a fingerprint clearance card per A.R.S. \'a7 36-411(A). However, documentation of the requirements in subsection (C)(1)(a), (b), and (c)(i)-(viii) was not available for review. 2. In an interview, E1 acknowledged E3's personnel record did not include the requirements per subsection (C)(1)(a), (b), and (c)(i)-(viii).
Based on documentation review and interview, the manager failed to ensure policies and procedures were implemented to cover orientation for employees. Findings include: 1. A review of the facility's policies and procedures revealed policies and procedures to cover orientation and in-service education for an assistant caregiver was not available for review. 2. In an interview, E1 reported E3 was an assistant caregiver. E1 acknowledged policies and procedures to cover orientation and in-service education for an assistant caregiver was not available for review.
Based on record review and interview, the manager failed to ensure a caregiver or assistant caregiver documented the services provided to a resident in the resident's medical record, for one of two residents sampled. The deficient practice posed a risk as services provided were unable to be verified and the required documentation was not provided during the inspection. Findings include: 1. A review of R1's medical record revealed a current written service plan dated July 17, 2023 for directed care services. The service plan stated "Elopement Risk...5. Moderate assistance with elopement Elopement Risk Daily @ Morning, Afternoon, Evening, Night, As Needed 1 person(s) required for this task. Provide supervision and redirection to avoid and prevent elopement. Provide checks throughout day/night and document whereabouts..." 2. A review of R1's medical record revealed an activities of daily living (ADL) document for July 2023. The ADL document stated "ELOPEMENT RISK Provide supervision and redirection to avoid and prevent elopement. Provide checks throughout day/night and document whereabouts..." The document included four time slots, "Night", "Morning", "Afternoon", and "Evening". The document stated the aforementioned service was provided on July 17, 2023 in the "morning" and "afternoon". However, documentation to indicate R1 was provided the aforementioned service in the "evening" of July 17, 2023 through July 23, 2023 and in the morning of July 24, 2023 was not available for review. 3. In an interview, E1 reported caregivers provided the aforementioned service, however, the caregivers forgot to document the aforementioned service. E1 acknowledged the aforementioned service was not documented on R1's ADL as provided.
Based on documentation review and interview, the manager failed to establish and document policies and procedures to protect the health and safety of a resident to cover job descriptions, duties, and qualifications, including required skills and knowledge, education, and experience for employees. The deficient practice posed a risk as policies and procedures reinforce and clarify standards expected of employees. Findings include: 1. A review of the facility's policies and procedures revealed policies and procedures to cover job descriptions, duties, and qualifications, including required skills and knowledge, education, and experience for an assistant caregiver was not available for review. 2. In an interview, E1 reported E3 was an assistant caregiver. E1 acknowledged policies and procedures to cover job descriptions, duties, and qualifications, including required skills and knowledge, education, and experience for an assistant caregiver was not available for review.
Based on documentation review and interview, the manager of an assisted living facility authorized to provide directed care services failed to implement policies and procedures to ensure the safety of a resident who may wander. Findings include: 1. A review of Department documentation revealed AL10165 was authorized to provide directed care services. 2. A review of facility documentation revealed an incident report dated July 12, 2023. The incident report stated "On 7/12 around dinner time...[R1] (dx dementia), completed [R1's] meals, then excused [R1] to go to the bathroom. Few minutes passed when the staff noticed [R1] was not back. When they investigated [R1's] whereabout, they noticed [R1] pushed and propped open a window in another resident's room, and escaped...Quarter of an hour later, the resident was found less than 300 ft from the property and fire department assessed [R1] and took [R1] to the ER...The resident was assessed and cleared around 2AM back to the facility. In the aftermath of the incident, the facility added security cameras, sensors to all entries and window to prevent future elopements." 3. A review of the facility's policies and procedures revealed a policy titled "WANDERING" dated January 14, 2019. The policy stated "...1. When an initial assessment is conducted on a prospective resident, his or her potential tendency to wander should be assessed. If an applicant has a demonstrated pattern of wandering from the location where the prospective resident is currently residing, he or she would not be considered appropriate for admission to the facility..." 4. In an interview, the Compliance Officer asked E1 for documentation for R1 of an initial assessment per the aforementioned policy, however, the documentation was not available for review. 5. In an interview, E1 reported the resident's windows are alarmed, security cameras were installed in the main areas of the facility, and the front and back door are locked to control egress. E1 acknowledged policies and procedures were not implemented that ensure the safety of a resident who may wander.
The following deficiencies were found during the on-site compliance inspection conducted on May 8, 2023:
Based on observation, documentation review, record review, and interview, the manager failed to ensure a personnel record for each employee included documentation of cardiopulmonary resuscitation training (CPR) and first aid training, for one of three caregivers sampled. The deficient practice posed a risk if E2 was unable to meet a resident's needs, the Department was unable to determine substantial compliance as the personnel record did not include the documentation, and the documentation was not provided to the Department within two hours after a Department request. Findings include: 1. The Compliance Officer observed E2 to be the only staff working on-site when the Compliance Officer arrived at the facility. 2. A review of the facility's policies and procedures revealed a policy titled "FIRST AID/CPR TRAINING REQUIREMENTS" dated December 14, 2019. The policy stated "POLICY: Assisted living facilities are required that facility staff members who provide care for residents, should have completed courses in First Aid and CPR and hold a currently valid card documenting completion of such courses in the facility at all times." 3. A review of E2's personnel record revealed a CPR and first aid training card with an issue date of December 27, 2020. The CPR and first aid training card stated "...Valid for 2 Years", and documentation of current CPR and first aid training for E2 was not available for review. 4. In an interview, E1 reported E2 had current CPR and first aid training, however, E1 and E2 could not locate the documentation. E1 acknowledged E2's current CPR and first aid training was not included in E2's personnel record.
Based on record review and interview, the administrator failed to ensure documentation required by this Article was provided to the Department within two hours after a Department request. The deficient practice posed a risk as the Department was unable to determine substantial compliance. Findings include: 1. A review of E2's personnel record revealed a cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and first aid training card with an issue date of December 27, 2020. The CPR and first aid training card stated "...Valid for 2 Years", and documentation of current CPR and first aid training for E2 was not available for review. 2. In an interview, E1 acknowledged documentation indicating compliance with the aforementioned requirements was not provided within two hours after a Department request
Based on observation and interview, the manager failed to ensure food stored by the facility was free from spoilage and was safe for human consumption. Findings include: 1. During the environmental inspection of the facility, the Compliance Officer observed thirty (30) eggs in a carton in a cabinet in the kitchen. 2. According to the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines, eggs should be stored at a temperature of 40 \'b0F or below. 3. In an interview, E2 reported the eggs are served for breakfast to the residents. 4. In an interview, E1 acknowledged food served to the residents was not protected from spoilage.
Based on observation and interview, the manager failed to ensure poisonous or toxic materials stored by the assisted living facility were stored in a locked area and inaccessible to residents. The deficient practice posed a risk to the physical health and safety of a resident. Findings include: 1. The Compliance Officer observed one ambulatory resident on the premises. 2. The Compliance Officer observed one container of "Lysol toilet bowl cleaner" in an unlocked cabinet in a hallway bathroom. The cabinet did not contain a locking device. The item contained a toxic warning label. 3. In an interview, E1 acknowledged the poisonous or toxic materials stored by the facility were not locked and were accessible to residents.
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.
Rose Court Senior Living
< 1 miAssisted Living · Phoenix, AZ
Camelback Post Acute Care and Rehabilitation
1.1 miNursing Home · Phoenix, AZ
The Weldon House
1.1 miAssisted Living · Phoenix, AZ
Olive Grove Assisted Living
1.1 miAssisted Living · Phoenix, AZ
Biltmore Estates
1.1 miAssisted Living · Phoenix, AZ
Biltmore Assisted Living LLC
1.2 miAssisted Living · Phoenix, AZ