True Care Assisted Home
Families consistently rate this highly — reviewers highlight compassionate and caring caregivers. Schedule a visit to confirm the fit.
based on 6 Google reviews
Watch True Care Assisted Home
Get an email when new inspections, ratings, or penalties are published for this facility.
We’ll only email you about this — no spam, unsubscribe anytime.
What this means for your family
This facility is an excellent choice if you are looking for a non-clinical, family-oriented environment with highly communicative staff. While the care is exceptionally loving, be aware that organized resident activities may be provided only occasionally.
Google Reviews
Google Reviews
6 reviews analyzed“Families can expect a warm, homelike environment where staff members are frequently praised for treating residents like family members. Reviewers specifically highlight excellent communication and a compassionate, non-clinical atmosphere, though activities are noted as being occasional rather than constant.”
Quality Themes
Tap a score for detailsStrengths
- Compassionate and caring caregivers
- Excellent family communication
- Homelike and welcoming atmosphere
- Strong relationship with hospice services
Rating Trends
Tap a year to see what changed
Distribution
How They Respond to Reviews
Questions for Your Tour
- 1We've heard such wonderful things about the warm, homelike atmosphere here; how do you ensure new residents feel welcomed into the family during their first few weeks?
- 2Since your team is so highly regarded for communication, what is the best way for us to stay updated on our loved one's daily well-being?
- 3We noticed your strong relationship with hospice services; how does your staff coordinate care with outside medical teams to ensure a seamless transition if needs change?
- 4What kind of daily activities or social gatherings do you host to help residents build meaningful connections with one another?
- 5In the event of a medical emergency during the night, what specific protocols do your caregivers follow to ensure immediate care?
- 6How do the caregivers here personalize their approach to meet the unique emotional and social needs of each resident?
Personalized based on this facility's data
Key Review Excerpts
“The main caregivers, Marita and Dante, are first-rate, very caring, knowledgeable”
“Their style is very homelike and welcoming. We couldn’t have asked for better care. Their communication with us was excellent.”
“My father lived at True Care Assisted Home for almost 5 years until he recently passed away this month. All of the caretakers are hard workers, and always had very good communication with me concerning the care of my father.”
State Inspection History
State Inspections
Source: AZ State Licensing Agency
Apr 1, 2025Routine
The following deficiencies were found during the on-site compliance inspection conducted on April 1, 2025:
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the manager failed to ensure that a caregiver's skills and knowledge were verified and documented before the caregiver provided health services for two of two personnel sampled. The deficient practice posed a risk if a personnel member was unable to meet a resident's needs. Findings include: 1. During the on-site compliance inspection, the Compliance Officer observed E2 at the facility, providing services to residents. 2. A review of E1's personnel record revealed E1 was hired as a caregiver. 3. A review of E1's and E2's personnel records did not include documentation of the verification of E1's and E2's skills and knowledge before E1 and E2 provided health services. 4. In an interview, E2 reported E1 has provided services at the facility. E2 acknowledged E1's and E2's personnel records did not include documentation of the verification of E1's and E2's skills and knowledge before E1 and E2 provided physical health services.
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the manager failed to ensure that a caregiver was only assigned to provide the assisted living services the caregiver had the documented skills and knowledge to perform, for one of two personnel sampled. Findings include: 1. During an environmental tour of the facility, the Compliance Officer observed a Hoyer Lift present at the facility to transfer R1. 2. A review of E2's personnel record revealed documentation of the verification of E2's skills and knowledge. However, the use of a Hoyer Lift was not included in the caregiver's skills sheet. 3. In an interview, E2 reported the facility used the Hoyer Lift to transfer R1. E2 acknowledged E2 was assigned to provide assisted living services E2 did not have the documented skills and knowledge to perform.
Based on record review, observation, and interview, the manager failed to ensure the caregiver documented the services provided in the resident's medical record, for two of two residents sampled. The deficient practice posed a risk as services could not be verified as provided against a service plan. Findings include: 1. A review of R1's medical record revealed a service plan (dated October 1, 2024) that indicated R1 required the following services: Assistance with dressing; Assistance with eating; Encouragement to eat; and Assistance with grooming. 2. A review of R1's activities of daily living (ADL) documentation, for March 2025, revealed missing documentation of the following services on March 26, 2025: Assistance with dressing at 8:00 PM; and Assistance with grooming at 8:00 PM. 3. A review of R1's ADL documentation, for March 2025, revealed missing documentation of the following services on March 29, 2025: Assistance with dressing at 8:00 PM; Assistance with eating at 5:00 PM; Encouragement to eat at 5:00 PM; and Assistance with grooming at 8:00 PM. 4. A review of R2's medical record revealed a service plan (dated February 28, 2025) that indicated R2 required the following services: Assistance with dressing; Assistance with eating; Encouragement to eat; Assistance with grooming; and Incontinence care. 5. A review of R2's ADL documentation, for March 2025, revealed missing documentation of the following services on March 26, 2025: Assistance with dressing at 8:00 PM; and Assistance with grooming at 8:00 PM. 6. A review of R2's ADL documentation, for March 2025, revealed missing documentation of the following services on March 29, 2025: Assistance with dressing at 8:00 PM; Assistance with eating at 5:00 PM; Encouragement to eat at 5:00 PM; Assistance with grooming at 8:00 PM; and Incontinence care at 5:00 PM. 7. In an interview, E2 reported the facility used an electronic ADL system, and the facility was having internet issues at the time of the missing documentation. E2 acknowledged a caregiver failed to document the services provided in R1's and R2's medical records.
Based on documentation review, observation, and interview, the manager failed to ensure that there was a means of exiting the facility that controlled or alerted 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 Department documentation revealed the facility was licensed to provide directed care services. 2. During an environmental tour of the facility, the Compliance Officer observed the front door, back door to the patio, and the door from a resident's room to the backyard were equipped with an alarm to alert employees of egress; however, the alarms were not turned on at the time of inspection. 3. In an interview, E2 acknowledged that the facility provided directed care services and did not contain a way to control or alert employees of the egress of a resident from the facility on all exits.
Based on record review, observation, and interview, the manager failed to ensure that medication administered to a resident was accurately documented in the resident's medical record, for two of two residents sampled. The deficient practice posed a risk as medication could not be verified as administered against a medication order. Findings include: 1. A review of R1's medical record revealed medication orders for the following medications: Amlodipine Besylate 2.5 milligrams (mg), 1 tablet by mouth (po) at bedtime (qhs); Docusate Sodium 100 mg, 2 capsules po qhs; Mirtazapine 15 mg, 1 tablet po qhs; and Trazodone HCL 50 mg, 1 tablet po qhs. 2. A review of R1's medication administration record (MAR) for March 2025, indicated R1 was not administered the following medications on March 26, 2025 and March 29, 2025 at 8:00 PM: Amlodipine Besylate 2.5 mg; Docusate Sodium 100 mg; Mirtazapine 15 mg; and Trazodone HCL 50 mg. 3. A review of R2's medical record revealed medication orders for the following medications: Mirtazapine 15 mg, 1 tablet po qhs; Senna 8.6 mg, 2 tablets po qhs; and Trazodone HCL 50 mg, 1 tablet po qhs. 4. A review of R2's MAR for March 2025, indicated R2 was not administered the following medications on March 26, 2025 and March 29, 2025 at 8:00 PM: Mirtazapine 15 mg; Senna 8.6 mg; and Trazodone HCL 50 mg. 5. In an interview, E2 reported the facility used an electronic MAR system and the facility was having internet issues at the time of the missing documentation. E2 acknowledged medications administered to R1 and R2 were not accurately documented in R1's and R2’s medical records.
Based on documentation review and interview, the manager failed to ensure that a current drug reference guide was available for use by personnel members. Findings include: 1. A review of the facility's drug reference guide revealed a publishing year of 2012. However, documentation of a current drug reference guide was not available for review. 2. In an interview, E2 acknowledged a current drug reference guide was not available for use by personnel members.
Based on documentation review and interview, the manager failed to ensure that a current toxicology reference guide was available for use by personnel members. Findings include: 1. A review of the facility's toxicology reference guide revealed a publishing year of 2014. However, documentation of a current toxicology reference guide was not available for review. 2. In an interview, E2 acknowledged a current toxicology reference guide was not available for use by personnel members.
Based on observation and interview, the manager failed to ensure that no more than two individuals reside in a residential unit or bedroom. Findings include: 1. During an environmental tour of the facility, the Compliance Officer observed Room Six included furniture for three residents. 2. In an interview, E2 reported the facility was unaware of the requirement, and had more than two residents residing in Room Six in the past. E2 acknowledged the facility had more than two individuals residing in a residential bedroom.
Contact
Get in Touch
Contact this facility directly and verify the details that matter most to your family.
References & Resources
Google Maps
Photos, directions & neighborhood info
Google Reviews
6 reviews from families & visitors
Medicare data downloads
Original nursing home datasets
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. 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.
Nearby Alternatives
Sandridge Post Acute
< 1 miNursing Home · Mesa, AZ
Mesa Adult Care Home
3.0 miAssisted Living · Mesa, AZ
Plaza Healthcare
3.7 miNursing Home · Scottsdale, AZ
Legato Living at Old Town
4.2 miAssisted Living · Scottsdale, AZ
Absolute Assisted Living Adult Care Home
5.2 miAssisted Living · Mesa, AZ
Osborn Health and Rehabilitation
5.5 miNursing Home · Scottsdale, AZ