SANTE OF SURPRISE
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Sante of Surprise has a Trust Grade of B+, which means it is above average and recommended for families considering their options. It ranks #26 out of 139 facilities in Arizona, placing it in the top half, and #21 out of 76 in Maricopa County, indicating that there are only a few local options that perform better. However, the facility is experiencing a worsening trend, with the number of issues increasing from 1 in 2023 to 7 in 2024. Staffing is somewhat concerning, with a turnover rate of 65%, which is higher than the state average of 48%, but they do have good RN coverage, exceeding that of 86% of state facilities. While Sante of Surprise has no fines recorded, there have been specific issues identified, such as failing to notify residents and families about COVID-19 cases, delays in necessary assessments for resident care, and a lack of adequate personal hygiene services for at least one resident. This highlights a need for improvement, even amid some strengths.
- Trust Score
- B+
- In Arizona
- #26/139
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 65% 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 ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 71 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Arizona nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 13 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
18pts above Arizona avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
17 points above Arizona average of 48%
The Ugly 13 deficiencies on record
Jul 2024
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0638
(Tag F0638)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, the CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) system for MDS (Minimum Data Set) data, st...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on resident and staff interviews, clinical record review, and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure one resident ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, and review of policy, the facility failed to ensure one resident (#123) recei...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that medications were stored in a secure manner that prevents accident hazards. The deficient practice could re...
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
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, clinical record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on review of clinical records, facility policy and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure an order for pain medication was followed as prescribed for one resident (#15).The deficient pr...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that EBP (Enhanced Barrier Protection) ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2023
1 deficiency
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, and facility policy, the facility failed to ensure that one medication in the medication storage refrigerator was not expired and one medication in a cart was n...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2022
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, clinical record review, resident and staff interviews, and review of policy and procedure, the facility f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, staff interviews, policy and procedures review, and the National Institute of Mental Health and...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that expired medical supplies were not ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Room Equipment
(Tag F0908)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, facility documentation, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure pads...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0885
(Tag F0885)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review, facility documentation, resident and resident family and staff interviews, and policy review, t...
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.
- • 13 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
- • 65% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
About This Facility
What is Sante Of Surprise's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns SANTE OF SURPRISE 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 Sante Of Surprise Staffed?
CMS rates SANTE OF SURPRISE's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 65%, which is 18 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 Sante Of Surprise?
State health inspectors documented 13 deficiencies at SANTE OF SURPRISE during 2022 to 2024. These included: 13 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Sante Of Surprise?
SANTE OF SURPRISE 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 SANTE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 70 certified beds and approximately 67 residents (about 96% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in SURPRISE, Arizona.
How Does Sante Of Surprise Compare to Other Arizona Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Arizona, SANTE OF SURPRISE's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.3, staff turnover (65%) 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 Sante Of Surprise?
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 Sante Of Surprise Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, SANTE OF SURPRISE 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 Sante Of Surprise Stick Around?
Staff turnover at SANTE OF SURPRISE is high. At 65%, the facility is 18 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 Sante Of Surprise Ever Fined?
SANTE OF SURPRISE 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 Sante Of Surprise on Any Federal Watch List?
SANTE OF SURPRISE 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.