Public Google reviewers rate this highly and often mention consistent and professional staff. Schedule a visit to confirm the fit.
based on 5 Google reviews
Email Richmond Hills Assisted Living Facility LLC 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 Richmond Hills Assisted Living Facility LLC highly. Reviewers highlight: consistent and professional staff, clean and well-maintained facility. Reviewer identity is not verified, and online reviews may not capture everything. Schedule a visit to assess the fit directly.
Families can expect a highly caring and stable environment characterized by long-term staff consistency and a warm, home-like atmosphere. Reviewers specifically praise the cleanliness of the facility, the quality of the nutritious home-cooked meals, and the professional, attentive nature of the caregiving team.
Quality Themes
Tap a score for detailsStrengths
Rating Trends
Tap a year to see what changed
Distribution · 5 analyzed
This facility actively engages with reviewer feedback.
Personalized based on this facility's data
Key Review Excerpts
“The staff is wonderful and consistent, I’ve not noticed any turnover, which says a lot about this home and the way it is managed.”
“All the staff and owner are truly gifted in their caregiving abilities. Always very clean and my brother loves the food.”
“The environment is very friendly and feels like home. The owner Toni is on top of everything, her staff is professional, knowledgeable and friendly. They provide delicious home‑cooked meals and desserts.”
Source: AZ State Licensing Agency
The following deficiencies were found during the on-site compliance inspection and investigation of complaint AZ00185656 conducted on November 2, 2023:
Based on record review and interview, the manager failed to ensure the facility did not accept or retain a resident who was confined to a bed or chair because of an inability to ambulate even with assistance, unless the the facility obtained a written determination from a medical practitioner every six months stating the resident's needs were met by the facility and the resident's needs were within the facility's scope of services, for one of two residents sampled who were unable to ambulate even with assistance. The deficient practice posed a risk if the facility was unable to meet the needs of the resident. Findings include: 1. A review of R2's medical record revealed a service plan reflecting R2 was non-ambulatory. R2's medical record contained a document titled, "Authorization for continued residency," dated November 18, 2021. However, there was no current documentation indicating R2's medical practitioner examined R2 and reviewed the facility's scope of services at least once every six months, and signed and dated a determination stating R2's needs could be met by the facility. 2. In an interview, E1 reported R2 was unable to ambulate even with assistance. E1 acknowledged R2's "Authorization for continued residency" form was not completed at least once every six months.
Based on observation and interview, the manager failed to ensure poisonous or toxic materials were stored in a locked area inaccessible to residents. Findings include: 1. During the environmental inspection of the facility, the Compliance Officer observed the following poisonous or toxic materials stored in unlocked areas accessible to residents: -On the kitchen counter, one half-gallon can of paint and primer; -In an unlocked kitchen cabinet, one bottle of "Lysol" and one bottle of dishwasher liquid; and -In an unlocked shed in the facility's back yard, twelve one-gallon cans of paint and primer. 2. In an interview, E1 acknowledged poisonous or toxic materials were not stored in locked areas inaccessible to residents.
Based on observation and interview, the manager failed to ensure medication was stored in a locked area. The deficient practice posed a risk to the health and safety of residents with access to the medication. Findings Include: 1. During the environmental inspection of the facility, the Compliance Officer observed a bottle of "Lorazepam" inside an unlocked lockbox in the facility's refrigerator. The lockbox contained a turn-key lock, however it was not locked at the time of the observation. 2. In an interview, E1 acknowledged the "Lorazepam" observed in the refrigerator was not stored in a locked location at the time of the inspection.
Based on record review and interview, the manager failed to ensure a caregiver documented the services provided to a resident in the resident's medical record, for two of two sampled residents. Findings include: 1. A review of R1's medical record revealed a service plan dated June 13, 2023, for personal care services. R1's service plan reflected R1 required assistance with showering, hair washing, peri care daily, combing hair daily, and incontinence check every two hours. 2. A review of R2's medical record revealed a service plan dated September 13, 2023, for directed care services. R2's service plan reflected R2 required assistance with showering, hair washing, peri care daily, grooming daily, and incontinence checks every two hours. 3. A review of R1's and R2's medical records revealed no documentation of services provided to R1 and R2 available for review. 4. In an interview, E1 confirmed R1 and R2 required assistance with activities of daily living, and acknowledged documentation of services provided to R1 and R2 was not available for review.
Based on record review and interview, the manager failed to ensure before or at the time of acceptance of an individual, the individual submitted documentation dated within 90 calendar days before the individual was accepted by the facility, to include whether the individual required continuous medical services, continuous or intermittent nursing services, or restraints; dated and signed by a physician, registered nurse practitioner, registered nurse, or physician assistant, for one of two sampled residents. The deficient practice posed a risk if the facility was unable to meet a resident's needs. Findings include: 1. A review of R1's medical record revealed no documentation to indicate whether R1 required continuous medical services, continuous or intermittent nursing services, or restraints dated and signed by a physician, registered nurse practitioner, registered nurse, or physician assistant. 2. In an interview, E1 acknowledged R1's medical record did not include documentation to indicate whether R1 required continuous medical services, continuous or intermittent nursing services, or restraints.
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.
God's Grace Assisted Living LLC
< 1 miAssisted Living · Phoenix, AZ
15th Way Home Assisted Care LLC
< 1 miAssisted Living · Phoenix, AZ
Golden Summers Care Home of Moon Valley LLC
< 1 miAssisted Living · Phoenix, AZ
Lb Assisted Living LLC
< 1 miAssisted Living · Phoenix, AZ
Paradise Home in Phoenix
< 1 miAssisted Living · Phoenix, AZ
Juniper Assisted Living LLC
< 1 miAssisted Living · Phoenix, AZ