OSBORN HEALTH AND REHABILITATION
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Osborn Health and Rehabilitation has a Trust Grade of B+, which means it is above average and generally recommended. It ranks #20 out of 139 nursing homes in Arizona, placing it in the top half of facilities in the state, and #16 out of 76 in Maricopa County, indicating there are only 15 local options that are better. The facility is improving, with reported issues decreasing from three in 2024 to one in 2025. Staffing is average with a 3/5 star rating and a turnover rate of 58%, which is close to the state average of 48%. There have been no fines, which is a positive sign, and the nursing home has average RN coverage, ensuring that residents receive adequate medical attention. However, there are some concerns. Recent inspections highlighted 15 issues, with 14 classified as potential harm, including a failure to provide appropriate assistance with daily living activities for some residents. For example, one resident who required one-on-one assistance during meals did not receive it as specified in their care plan. Additionally, there were instances where medication administration protocols were not followed, raising questions about the overall adherence to professional standards. While there are strengths at Osborn Health and Rehabilitation, families should weigh these concerns carefully.
- Trust Score
- B+
- In Arizona
- #20/139
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 58% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Arizona facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ○ Average
- Each resident gets 37 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Arizona. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 15 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
11pts above Arizona avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
10 points above Arizona average of 48%
The Ugly 15 deficiencies on record
Jul 2025
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility failed to ensure that drug records are in order and that an account of all controlled drugs are maintained for 1 ou...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2024
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, staff interviews, review of the manufacturer instructions and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that one medication in a medication cart was labeled, with an open date...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** -Regarding Resident #369:
The resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer ' s disease and Non-Alzheimer '...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0676
(Tag F0676)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, interviews, facility documentation, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure appropriate treatment and services for activities of daily living were provided,...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2023
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interview, review of records and policy, and observation of current practice, the facility failed to ensure the O...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on staff interviews, review of policy, and observation of current practice, the facility failed to ensure professional sta...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical review, staff interviews, and facility policy and procedures, the facility failed to administer pain medicatio...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2023
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of clinical records, resident and staff interviews and review of policies and procedures, the facility failed to...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Abuse Prevention Policies
(Tag F0607)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of clinical records, resident and staff interviews, review of the State Agency (SA) Database, and review of faci...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of clinical records, resident and staff interviews, review of the State Agency (SA) Database, and review of faci...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of clinical records, resident and staff interviews, review of the State Agency (SA) Database, and review of faci...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2022
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, clinical record review, staff interviews, and facility policy and procedures, the facility failed to ensur...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, clinical record review, staff interviews, and review of policy and procedure, the facility failed to ensur...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, staff interviews and policies and procedures, the facility failed to ensure food stored in 1 of 2 nourishment refrigerators were dated and labeled. The deficient practice could ...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on facility documents and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the Daily Staff Postings for nursing staff was accurate for the number of staff and hours worked. The deficient practice...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Grade B+ (80/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Arizona.
- • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Arizona facilities.
- • 15 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
- • 58% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
About This Facility
What is Osborn's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns OSBORN HEALTH AND REHABILITATION an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Arizona, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Osborn Staffed?
CMS rates OSBORN HEALTH AND REHABILITATION's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 58%, which is 11 percentage points above the Arizona average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs.
What Have Inspectors Found at Osborn?
State health inspectors documented 15 deficiencies at OSBORN HEALTH AND REHABILITATION during 2022 to 2025. These included: 14 with potential for harm and 1 minor or isolated issues.
Who Owns and Operates Osborn?
OSBORN HEALTH AND REHABILITATION is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by THE ENSIGN GROUP, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 130 certified beds and approximately 109 residents (about 84% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in SCOTTSDALE, Arizona.
How Does Osborn Compare to Other Arizona Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Arizona, OSBORN HEALTH AND REHABILITATION's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.3, staff turnover (58%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Osborn?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's high staff turnover rate.
Is Osborn Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, OSBORN HEALTH AND REHABILITATION has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 5-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Arizona. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Osborn Stick Around?
Staff turnover at OSBORN HEALTH AND REHABILITATION is high. At 58%, the facility is 11 percentage points above the Arizona average of 46%. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?
Was Osborn Ever Fined?
OSBORN HEALTH AND REHABILITATION has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Osborn on Any Federal Watch List?
OSBORN HEALTH AND REHABILITATION is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.