Public Google reviewers rate this highly and often mention compassionate and loving nursing staff. Schedule a visit to confirm the fit.
based on 26 Google reviews
Email Mary & Pete's Assisted Living 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 Mary & Pete's Assisted Living highly. Reviewers highlight: compassionate and loving nursing staff, clean and well-maintained residential setting. Reviewer identity is not verified, and online reviews may not capture everything. Schedule a visit to assess the fit directly.
Families considering Mary & Pete's can expect a highly compassionate, home-like environment where staff are frequently praised for treating residents like family. While the vast majority of reviews highlight exceptional care and cleanliness, there are isolated, severe allegations regarding poor communication and unprofessionalism from ownership.
Quality Themes
Tap a score for detailsStrengths
Concerns
Rating Trends
Tap a year to see what changed
Distribution · 26 analyzed
This facility rarely responds to reviews.
Personalized based on this facility's data
Key Review Excerpts
“The facility is very homey, clean and the patients well attended to thanks to their loving staff! Our father was always clean and cared for 24/7!”
“The outstanding caring, kindness, warmth, knowledge, concern and communication are 5+ and have been for over 2 years.”
“The owner (Patricia) of Mary and Pete’s assisted living homes is a horrible person. She lies, is greedy, and uncaring.”
Source: AZ State Licensing Agency
No deficiencies were found during the on-site investigation of complaints 00149712 and 00149705, conducted on November 24, 2025.
The following deficiencies were found during the on-site compliance inspection conducted on October 10, 2025:
Based on record review and interview, the manager accepted and retained a resident who was confined to a bed or chair without meeting the requirements of R9-10-814(B)(2). The deficient practice posed a risk if the facility was unable to meet a resident's needs. Findings include: 1. R9-10-814(B)(2) states, "A manager of an assisted living facility authorized to provide personal care services may accept or retain a resident who is confined to a bed or chair because of an inability to ambulate even with assistance if: the resident's primary care provider... examines the resident... at least once every six months throughout the duration of the resident's condition; reviews the assisted living facility's scope of services; and signs and dates a determination stating that the resident's needs can be met by the assisted living facility..." 2. A review of R2’s medical record revealed a current service plan for directed care services, which indicated R2 was bedbound. Further review of R2’s medical record revealed evidence of documentation indicating R2 was examined by a medical provider per R9-10-814(B)(2), was unavailable for review. 3. In an interview, E1 acknowledged R2 was non-ambulatory and was accepted into the facility in the same condition. E1 acknowledged R2’s medical record did not include the required determination per R9-10-814(B)(2). 4. In an exit interview, the findings were reviewed with E1, and no additional information was provided.
An on-site investigation of complaint AZ00197687 was conducted on July 24, 2023, and the following deficiencies were cited .
Based on documentation review, observation, and interview, the manager failed to ensure when a resident had an incident resulting in the resident needing medical services, a caregiver documented any action taken to prevent the incident from occurring in the future. The deficient practice posed a direct health and safety risk to residents. Findings include: 1. A review of documentation provided by E1 revealed R1 had an incident on July 10, 2023, and July 11, 2023. The Compliance Officer observed the following was missing from the incident reports: - any action taken to prevent the incident from occurring in the future. 2. During an interview, E1, and E2 acknowledged R1's incident reports did not include documentation showing any action taken to prevent the incident from occurring in the future.
Based on documentation review, and interview, the manager failed to establish, document, and implement policies and procedures to protect the health and safety of a resident that cover methods by which the assisted living facility is aware of the general or specific whereabouts of a resident, based on the level of assisted living services provided to the resident and the assisted living services the assisted living facility is authorized to provide. The deficient practice posed a risk as the standards expected of employees in the policies and procedures were not followed. Findings include: 1. A review of the facility's policy and procedure manual revealed the manual was last reviewed on April 3, 2023. 2. A review of this manual revealed no documentation was available for review on covering methods by which the assisted living facility is aware of the general or specific whereabouts of a resident, based on the level of assisted living services provided to the resident and the assisted living services the assisted living facility is authorized to provide. 3. In an interview, E1 and E2 acknowledged documentation was not available for review on covering methods by which the assisted living facility is aware of the general or specific whereabouts of a resident, based on the level of assisted living services provided to the resident and the assisted living services the assisted living facility is authorized to provide.
Based on record review, documentation review, observation, and interview, the manager of a facility providing directed care services failed to ensure a means of exiting the facility providing access to an outside area controls or alerts employees of the egress of a resident from the facility. The deficient practice posed a risk if the facility was unaware of the general or specific whereabouts of a resident. Findings include: 1. A review of the license issued by the Department revealed the facility was licensed to provide directed care services. 2. During the environmental inspection the Compliance Officer observed the patio door led into a courtyard. The patio door did not have any means to alert employees of a resident's egress. The Compliance Officer check a door located in a hallway on the left side of the facility. This door had an alarm at the top, however, the alarm was not in working order. The Compliance officer checked a door off the kitchen which entered onto the patio. This door did not alert employees of a resident's egress. 3. During an interview, E1, and E2 acknowledged the patio doors did not have any means to alert employees of a resident's egress.
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.
Emerine Hills Adult Care Home
< 1 miAssisted Living · Tucson, AZ
La Paz Assisted Living III
< 1 miAssisted Living · Tucson, AZ
Mountain View Care Center
< 1 miNursing Home · Tucson, AZ
La Canada Care Center
< 1 miNursing Home · Tucson, AZ
Mountain View Retirement Village
< 1 miAssisted Living · Tucson, AZ
Cedar Cove Assisted Living Home
< 1 miAssisted Living · Tucson, AZ