Every person who worked here at any point in the quarter, employees and contractors. It is not how many are on site at once: that is the "on an average day" figure.
184
57 employees · 127 contractors · 20 on an average day Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine
Nursing Home & Skilled Nursing · Murray, UT
ALM Inspection Grade
D
ALM's inspection grade is 65 / 100, a D — 17 points below the Utah average for CMS-certified facilities (82/100) · A proprietary Assisted Living Magazine grade.A 0–100 score of a facility's regulatory inspection record, shown as a letter and compared with other facilities of the same kind in the same state. It is not a government rating.
ALM's inspection grade is 65 / 100, a D — 17 points below the Utah average for CMS-certified facilities (82/100) · A proprietary Assisted Living Magazine grade.A 0–100 score of a facility's regulatory inspection record, shown as a letter and compared with other facilities of the same kind in the same state. It is not a government rating.
CMS overall rating
3/5
CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) is the federal agency that rates nursing home quality. Its Overall Rating runs from 1 to 5 stars, combining health inspections, staffing, and quality measures, with inspections weighted most heavily.
3/5
CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) is the federal agency that rates nursing home quality. Its Overall Rating runs from 1 to 5 stars, combining health inspections, staffing, and quality measures, with inspections weighted most heavily.
Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine
Nursing Home & Skilled Nursing · Murray, UT
ALM Inspection Grade
D
ALM's inspection grade is 65 / 100, a D — 17 points below the Utah average for CMS-certified facilities (82/100) · A proprietary Assisted Living Magazine grade.A 0–100 score of a facility's regulatory inspection record, shown as a letter and compared with other facilities of the same kind in the same state. It is not a government rating.
ALM's inspection grade is 65 / 100, a D — 17 points below the Utah average for CMS-certified facilities (82/100) · A proprietary Assisted Living Magazine grade.A 0–100 score of a facility's regulatory inspection record, shown as a letter and compared with other facilities of the same kind in the same state. It is not a government rating.
CMS overall rating
3/5
CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) is the federal agency that rates nursing home quality. Its Overall Rating runs from 1 to 5 stars, combining health inspections, staffing, and quality measures, with inspections weighted most heavily.
3/5
CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) is the federal agency that rates nursing home quality. Its Overall Rating runs from 1 to 5 stars, combining health inspections, staffing, and quality measures, with inspections weighted most heavily.
Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine accepts Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay.
Overview of Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine
Rocky Mountain Care, Cottage on Vine offers skilled nursing and nursing home care in Murray, UT. Skilled nursing provides licensed nursing care on site, while rehabilitation includes physical, occupational, speech and recreational therapies. That combination may suit someone who needs ongoing nursing support alongside rehabilitation.
The home has 61 beds. Total nurse staffing is 3h 9m per resident per day, representing the combined nursing time allocated to each resident across a day. Medicare, Medicaid and private pay are accepted, giving families several listed ways to cover care, including public benefits or direct payment.
IV therapy is available for residents who need that treatment. A salon and spa provide personal grooming services within the community, and transportation and outings to mountains, expos, festivals, barbecues and other outdoor activities give residents ways to participate beyond the home.
Quality ratings
The Overall CMS Rating combines results from health inspections, staffing levels and quality measures. Health inspections carry the most weight. Staffing and quality scores can increase or decrease the final rating based on performance compared to state and national standards.
Based on the results of the facility's three most recent standard inspections and any complaint investigations. CMS reviews the number, scope, and severity of deficiencies, with more recent findings weighted more heavily.
Measures average nursing staff hours per resident per day, including Registered Nurses (RNs) and total nursing staff. Ratings are adjusted based on the level of care residents require and are compared to state and national benchmarks.
Based on clinical and physical health indicators reported to CMS, such as hospital readmissions, falls, pressure ulcers, and improvements in mobility. These measures reflect how well residents' health needs are being managed.
Staffing
Data period: Q4 2025 (October 1 – December 31, 2025).
Nursing care per resident per day and state rankings: CMS Provider Information.
Headcount, shifts and contractors: CMS Payroll-Based Journal (PBJ).
Resident count: CMS Long-Term Care Facility Characteristics (data as of Jun 2026).
Total nursing care per resident / day
This nursing home is ranked 43rd out of 68 nursing homes we track in Utah for nurse hours. Total adjusted nursing hours per resident per day, combining RN, LPN, and aide time. CMS adjusts this for case-mix so facilities can be fairly compared.
3h 9m
This nursing home is ranked 43rd out of 68 nursing homes we track in Utah for nurse hours. Total adjusted nursing hours per resident per day, combining RN, LPN, and aide time. CMS adjusts this for case-mix so facilities can be fairly compared.
3h 9mStandout metric: Physical therapist is +12% above Utah average
5 of 6 metrics below Utah average
Daily care time per resident, by role
Registered nurse (RN)
RNs hold the highest nursing license and can assess residents, interpret test results, and direct care plans. More RN hours per day often signals stronger clinical oversight and faster response to health changes. 37 total: 5 of the facility's own employees and 32 agency contractors.
37 staff · 8.6-hour shifts
55m
↓ 23% · UT 1h 11mThis facility: 55m per resident per day, 23% below the Utah average of 1h 11m (among Utah facilities reporting a recent figure).
RNs hold the highest nursing license and can assess residents, interpret test results, and direct care plans. More RN hours per day often signals stronger clinical oversight and faster response to health changes. 37 total: 5 of the facility's own employees and 32 agency contractors.
37 staff · 8.6-hour shiftsUS average: 41m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 41m
LPN / LVN
Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) or Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVNs) deliver routine hands-on care — medication administration, wound dressing, and monitoring vital signs. They work under RN supervision and make up a large share of daily bedside care. 13 total: 5 of the facility's own employees and 8 agency contractors.
13 staff · 7.9-hour shifts
18m
↓ 40% · UT 30mThis facility: 18m per resident per day, 40% below the Utah average of 30m (among Utah facilities reporting a recent figure).
Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) or Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVNs) deliver routine hands-on care — medication administration, wound dressing, and monitoring vital signs. They work under RN supervision and make up a large share of daily bedside care. 13 total: 5 of the facility's own employees and 8 agency contractors.
13 staff · 7.9-hour shiftsUS average: 52m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 52m
Certified nursing assistant
Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) provide the most direct day-to-day assistance: bathing, dressing, feeding, and mobility. Nurse aide hours are typically the largest staffing category and directly affect residents' quality of life. 110 total: 23 of the facility's own employees and 87 agency contractors.
110 staff · 7.8-hour shifts
1h 56m
↓ 18% · UT 2h 22mThis facility: 1h 56m per resident per day, 18% below the Utah average of 2h 22m (among Utah facilities reporting a recent figure).
Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) provide the most direct day-to-day assistance: bathing, dressing, feeding, and mobility. Nurse aide hours are typically the largest staffing category and directly affect residents' quality of life. 110 total: 23 of the facility's own employees and 87 agency contractors.
110 staff · 7.8-hour shiftsUS average: 2h 21m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 2h 21m
Physical therapist
Hours per resident per day provided by licensed Physical Therapists (PTs) or PT Assistants. PT services help residents recover mobility after injury or illness and are especially important for post-acute (short-stay) rehabilitation.
8m
↑ 12% · UT 7mThis facility: 8m per resident per day, 12% above the Utah average of 7m (among Utah facilities reporting a recent figure).
Hours per resident per day provided by licensed Physical Therapists (PTs) or PT Assistants. PT services help residents recover mobility after injury or illness and are especially important for post-acute (short-stay) rehabilitation.
US average: 4m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 4m
Total nursing, weekends
Combined nursing hours (RN + LPN + Nurse Aide) per resident per day on weekends. Staffing often drops on weekends — this figure reveals whether the facility maintains adequate coverage outside of weekday hours.
RN + LPN + aide · Sat–Sun
2h 45m
↓ 22% · UT 3h 31mThis facility: 2h 45m per resident per day, 22% below the Utah average of 3h 31m (among Utah facilities reporting a recent figure).
Combined nursing hours (RN + LPN + Nurse Aide) per resident per day on weekends. Staffing often drops on weekends — this figure reveals whether the facility maintains adequate coverage outside of weekday hours.
RN + LPN + aide · Sat–SunUS average: 3h 26m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 3h 26m
RN, weekends
Registered nurse hours specifically on weekends. Facilities sometimes reduce RN presence on Saturdays and Sundays — a low weekend RN figure compared to weekday hours can indicate reduced clinical oversight when most administrative staff are absent.
Sat–Sun
41m
↓ 17% · UT 50mThis facility: 41m per resident per day, 17% below the Utah average of 50m (among Utah facilities reporting a recent figure).
Registered nurse hours specifically on weekends. Facilities sometimes reduce RN presence on Saturdays and Sundays — a low weekend RN figure compared to weekday hours can indicate reduced clinical oversight when most administrative staff are absent.
Sat–SunUS average: 29m.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse. US 29m
Headcount
Every person who worked here at any point in the quarter, employees and contractors. It is not how many are on site at once: that is the "on an average day" figure.
184
57 employees · 127 contractors · 20 on an average day
184 total staff / 46 residents. Residents: CMS Long-Term Care Facility Characteristics (data as of Jun 2026); staff: CMS Payroll-Based Journal (Q4 2025).Residents and staff come from two different CMS releases, so the two counts can be a few months apart.
4.00 : 1
↑ 97% · UT 2.03This facility: 4.00 staff per resident, 97% above the Utah average of 2.03 (among Utah facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
184 staff ÷ 46 residents
See full Utah ranking →
Average hours one staff member works on a day they are on shift, across every role.
7.8 h
↓ 1% · UT 7.9 hThis facility: 7.8 h, 1% below the Utah average of 7.9 h (among Utah facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
14,399 staff hours this quarter
See full Utah ranking →58.9% of staff hours were worked by the facility's own employees
Utah average: 94.4% · Contractors this quarter: Certified Nursing Assistant (87), Registered Nurse (32), Licensed Practical Nurse (8)
Why it matters: employees work here week after week and get to know each resident's routines and needs. Agency contractors often rotate between facilities, so a higher employee share usually means more consistent care.
By The Numbers
Community insights.
Bed count
A smaller, more intimate setting that may offer a quieter environment and closer staff-resident interactions.
61
Rank #51 / 72Bed count — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 51st out of 72 nursing homes we track in Utah for bed count. Shows this facility's certified or reported bed count compared to other Utah facilities. Larger communities may offer more amenities, programs, and on-site services for residents and families. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Utah that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
A smaller, more intimate setting that may offer a quieter environment and closer staff-resident interactions.
61
Rank #51 / 72Bed count — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 51st out of 72 nursing homes we track in Utah for bed count. Shows this facility's certified or reported bed count compared to other Utah facilities. Larger communities may offer more amenities, programs, and on-site services for residents and families. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Utah that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.Smaller home · May offer a more intimate, personalized care environment.
Years of operating
A longer operating history, which may indicate experience navigating regulations and delivering ongoing care. This is the number of years in operation under current management.
Rank #37 / 63Years in operation — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 37th out of 63 nursing homes we track in Utah for years in operation. Shows how long this facility has been in operation compared to other Utah facilities. Longer operating histories may benefit residents, families, and staff. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Utah that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
A longer operating history, which may indicate experience navigating regulations and delivering ongoing care. This is the number of years in operation under current management.
Rank #37 / 63Years in operation — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 37th out of 63 nursing homes we track in Utah for years in operation. Shows how long this facility has been in operation compared to other Utah facilities. Longer operating histories may benefit residents, families, and staff. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Utah that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
35
years
Walk Score
Somewhat walkable. Some errands can be accomplished on foot, with a mix of nearby amenities.
Rank #47 / 81Walk Score — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 47th out of 81 nursing homes we track in Utah for walk score. Shows how walkable this facility's neighborhood is compared to the average walk score across Utah facilities. Higher scores benefit residents, families, and staff. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Utah that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
Somewhat walkable. Some errands can be accomplished on foot, with a mix of nearby amenities.
Rank #47 / 81Walk Score — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 47th out of 81 nursing homes we track in Utah for walk score. Shows how walkable this facility's neighborhood is compared to the average walk score across Utah facilities. Higher scores benefit residents, families, and staff. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Utah that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
51
/ 100
Occupancy rate
Occupancy lower than 85% suggests more openings may be available.
Rank #50 / 58Occupancy rate — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 50th out of 58 nursing homes we track in Utah for occupancy. Shows this facility's occupancy rate versus the Utah average, with its Statewide rank out of 58. Higher occupancy signals strong local demand and financial stability. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Utah that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
Occupancy lower than 85% suggests more openings may be available.
Rank #50 / 58Occupancy rate — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 50th out of 58 nursing homes we track in Utah for occupancy. Shows this facility's occupancy rate versus the Utah average, with its Statewide rank out of 58. Higher occupancy signals strong local demand and financial stability. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Utah that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
72.1%
This home usually has availability
Based on 44 residents and 61 beds. Source: CMS Provider Information, average daily residents
Similar to the Utah average: 71.4%
Avg. Length of Stay
Average number of days residents stay at this facility, based on CMS cost report data. Shorter stays often reflect post-acute or rehab care; longer stays reflect long-term care.
Average number of days residents stay at this facility, based on CMS cost report data. Shorter stays often reflect post-acute or rehab care; longer stays reflect long-term care.
226
days
BBB Rating
An independent rating from the Better Business Bureau based on factors such as complaint history, transparency, and business practices.
An independent rating from the Better Business Bureau based on factors such as complaint history, transparency, and business practices.
F
Not Accredited
How BBB ratings workAbout This Community
Facility TypeNursing Care Facility
IssuanceJanuary 1, 1991
ExpirationOctober 31, 2026 Expires today
CountySalt Lake
Activated Insights 2025 Customer Experience Award
Resident Council
Outpatient Therapy
IV Therapy
Physician Services
Palliative CareCare focused on relieving pain, symptoms, and stress while supporting quality of life. It can be provided alongside treatment for a serious illness.
Respite CareRespite care provides families and unpaid caregivers with short-term relief from caregiving duties. Care can range from a few hours to a few weeks.
Transportation
Emergency Call System
Pets not allowed
Bbq Area
Wi-Fi
Beauty Salon
Laundry
Activities
Outings
Religious Services
CMS Health Inspection History
ALM Inspection Grade
65 / 100
Calculated from CMS inspection data for this community's nursing-home beds
How it compares
17 points below the Utah average for CMS-certified facilities (82/100)
Category breakdown
Citations
Concern
227 severity-weighted points (57 deficiencies) · 3× higher than the typical CMS-certified UT facility (median: 75)
Enforcement
Concern
$78,946 in fines · 3 enforcement actions
Persistence
Typical
40 days to fix issues · about the same as the typical CMS-certified UT facility (median: 40)
Total health inspections
7
↑ 106% · UT 3.4This facility: 7, 106% above the UT average of 3.4 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Total health citations
57
Rank #65 / 73Health citations — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 65th out of 73 nursing homes we track in Utah for health citations. Shows this facility's total health deficiency citations benchmarked to the Utah State average, with a ranking across all 73 UT facilities. Lower citation counts earn a better rank. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Utah that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.↑ 109% · UT 27.3This facility: 57, 109% above the UT average of 27.3 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Citations per inspection
8.14
Rank #46 / 73Citations per inspection — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 46th out of 73 nursing homes we track in Utah for citations per inspection. Shows average deficiency citations per CMS inspection for this facility versus the Utah mean across 73 facilities with citation data. Lower is better. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Utah that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.↑ 4% · UT 7.83This facility: 8.14, 4% above the UT average of 7.83 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Citation severity
100% corrected
57 of 57 citations corrected
Critical
J–L
4
↑ 567% · UT 0.6This facility: 4, 567% above the UT average of 0.6 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Immediate jeopardy
Serious
G–I
6
↑ 131% · UT 2.6This facility: 6, 131% above the UT average of 2.6 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Actual harm
Moderate
D–F
47
↑ 96% · UT 24This facility: 47, 96% above the UT average of 24 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
No harm, more than minimal risk
Minor
A–C
0
↓ 100% · UT 0.1This facility: 0, 100% below the UT average of 0.1 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
No harm, minimal riskLatest inspection: Nov 05, 2025 · 1 citation (Quality of Care, moderate), corrected
Most cited category: Quality of Life & Care, 14 of 57 citations · 9 categories in total
Citations history
Most recent first
Nov 05, 2025
1 citation
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Mar 06, 2025
16 citations
Abuse/Neglect moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Abuse/Neglect moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Administration moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Nutrition moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Nutrition moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Pharmacy moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Pharmacy moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Pharmacy moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
May 15, 2024
5 citations
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Care Planning moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Nov 08, 2023
10 citations
Abuse/Neglect moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Abuse/Neglect moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Abuse/Neglect moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control serious citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Nursing Services moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Pharmacy moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Resident Rights moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Sep 21, 2023
4 citations
Abuse/Neglect moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Administration serious citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care serious citation
Corrected
Corrected
Jun 15, 2023
5 citations
Administration moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care serious citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care serious citation
Corrected
Corrected
Quality of Care moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Jun 13, 2022
9 citations
Abuse/Neglect critical citation
Corrected
Corrected
Abuse/Neglect critical citation
Corrected
Corrected
Abuse/Neglect critical citation
Corrected
Corrected
Administration moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Administration moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Infection Control moderate citation
Corrected
Corrected
Showing the 50 most recent of 57 citations.
Top deficiency categories
Share of 57 citations
Quality of Life & Care
14 deficiencies (25%)
Infection Control
9 deficiencies (16%)
Abuse, Neglect & Exploitation
9 deficiencies (16%)
Resident Rights
8 deficiencies (14%)
Administration
5 deficiencies (9%)
Pharmacy Services
5 deficiencies (9%)
Resident Assessment & Care Planning
3 deficiencies (5%)
Nutrition & Dietary
3 deficiencies (5%)
Nursing & Physician Services
1 deficiency (2%)
How citations are counted
Health citations are formal notices following inspections when they fail to comply with safety and care standards.
37 of 57 citations resulted from standard inspections; and 18 of 57 resulted from complaint investigations.
Includes all CMS health inspection records for this property, which could include management/ownership changes.
Source
Data sourced from CMS Health Deficiencies reports. Citation severity codes range from A (least serious) to L (most serious). Immediate Jeopardy (J-L) citations indicate situations where the facility's noncompliance has placed residents at risk of death or serious harm.
Show Inspection Reports
Enforcement
Penalties and fines
Penalties and fines
Federal penalties imposed by CMS for regulatory violations, including civil money penalties (fines) and denials of payment for new Medicare/Medicaid admissions.
Source: CMS Penalties Database · Data as of Aug 2026
3 penalties in the past 3 years
Latest: Nov 8, 2023 · $55,999 civil money penalty
Nov 8, 2023 · $55,999 civil money penalty
Sep 21, 2023 · $22,947 civil money penalty
Sep 21, 2023 · 4-day payment denial
Total fines
$78,946
↑ 81% · UT $44KThis facility: $78,946, 81% above the Utah average of $43,577. Average among the 51 Utah facilities with a penalty on record.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.US avg $67KUS average: $67,417, among the 6,775 US facilities with a penalty on record.Rank #69 / 74Federal fines — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 69th out of 74 nursing homes we track in Utah for federal fines. Shows this facility's cumulative CMS federal fine dollars versus the Utah average among facilities with fines, and where it ranks among 74 facilities in the pool. Lower total dollars mean a better rank. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Utah that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
Number of fines
2
↑ 24% · UT 1.61This facility: 2, 24% above the Utah average of 1.61. Average among the 51 Utah facilities with a penalty on record.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.US avg 1.96US average: 1.96, among the 6,775 US facilities with a penalty on record.
Payment denials
Serious action where Medicare and/or Medicaid temporarily stops payments for new residents until issues are fixed.
Serious action where Medicare and/or Medicaid temporarily stops payments for new residents until issues are fixed.
1
4 days
↑ 240% · UT 0.29This facility: 1, 240% above the Utah average of 0.29. Average among the 51 Utah facilities with a penalty on record.Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.US avg 0.36US average: 0.36, among the 6,775 US facilities with a penalty on record.
Penalty history · past 3 years
Nov 8, 2023
Civil money penalty
Fines imposed for noncompliance, which can be assessed per day or per instance of violation.
$55,999
Fines imposed for noncompliance, which can be assessed per day or per instance of violation.
$55,999
Sep 21, 2023
Civil money penalty
Fines imposed for noncompliance, which can be assessed per day or per instance of violation.
$22,947
Fines imposed for noncompliance, which can be assessed per day or per instance of violation.
$22,947
Sep 21, 2023
Payment denial
Serious action where Medicare and/or Medicaid temporarily stops payments for new residents until issues are fixed.
New admissions not paid
4 days
Serious action where Medicare and/or Medicaid temporarily stops payments for new residents until issues are fixed.
New admissions not paid
4 daysFine amount comparison
This facility
$78,946
Utah average
$43,577
US average
$67,417
Totals count every penalty on record; the history lists the past 3 years. Utah and US averages are among facilities with a penalty on record.
A civil money penalty is a fine for noncompliance, per day or per instance. A payment denial stops Medicare/Medicaid payments for new residents until issues are fixed.
Health Outcomes
Quality of care over time
How residents at this home fare on health outcomes and preventive care, compared with the Utah average.
CMS star rating for the care of long-stay residents, who live at the home for 100 days or more. It is built from the long-stay quality measures below. 5 stars is the best.
5
/ 5
Significantly above average
↑ 25% · UT 4.0This facility: 5.0, 25% above the UT average of 4.0 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
CMS star rating for the care of short-stay residents, mostly people recovering after a hospital stay for under 100 days. It is built from the short-stay quality measures below. 5 stars is the best.
5
/ 5
Significantly above average
↑ 54% · UT 3.3This facility: 5.0, 54% above the UT average of 3.3 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Average of five long-stay measures: pressure ulcers, falls with major injury, unplanned weight loss, worsening ability to walk, and needing more help with daily activities. Each is the % of residents affected, so lower is better.
8.7
Score · lower is better
↑ 21% · UT 7.1This facility: 8.7, 21% above the UT average of 7.1 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Average of three long-stay measures: needing more help with daily activities, worsening ability to walk, and loss of bowel or bladder control. Each is the % of residents affected, so lower is better.
16.6
Score · lower is better
↑ 4% · UT 16.0This facility: 16.6, 4% above the UT average of 16.0 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.11 long-stay measures: 5 better, 3 worse, 3 near UT average
5 short-stay measures: 2 better, 1 near UT average, 2 compared with US only
Long-stay residents
People who live at the home · 11 measures
Daily care & independence
Needed more help with daily activities
Percent of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased
10.1%
↓ 10% · UT 11.3This facility: 10.1, 10% below the UT average of 11.3 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased
10.1%
↓ 10% · UT 11.3This facility: 10.1, 10% below the UT average of 11.3 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Walking ability worsened
Percent of long-stay residents whose ability to move independently worsened
18.1%
↑ 20% · UT 15.1This facility: 18.1, 20% above the UT average of 15.1 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents whose ability to move independently worsened
18.1%
↑ 20% · UT 15.1This facility: 18.1, 20% above the UT average of 15.1 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Bowel or bladder incontinence (low-risk residents)
Percent of low risk long-stay residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
21.6%
≈ 0% · UT 21.5This facility: 21.6, level with the UT average of 21.5 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of low risk long-stay residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
21.6%
≈ 0% · UT 21.5This facility: 21.6, level with the UT average of 21.5 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Safety & clinical stability
Urinary tract infection
Percent of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection
0.7%
↓ 63% · UT 1.8This facility: 0.7, 63% below the UT average of 1.8 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection
0.7%
↓ 63% · UT 1.8This facility: 0.7, 63% below the UT average of 1.8 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Falls with major injury
Percent of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
7.4%
↑ 196% · UT 2.5This facility: 7.4, 196% above the UT average of 2.5 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
7.4%
↑ 196% · UT 2.5This facility: 7.4, 196% above the UT average of 2.5 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Pressure ulcers (high-risk residents)
Percent of long-stay high risk residents with pressure ulcers
3.2%
↓ 18% · UT 3.9This facility: 3.2, 18% below the UT average of 3.9 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay high risk residents with pressure ulcers
3.2%
↓ 18% · UT 3.9This facility: 3.2, 18% below the UT average of 3.9 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Physical & mental health
Lost too much weight
Percent of long-stay residents who lose too much weight
4.4%
↑ 31% · UT 3.4This facility: 4.4, 31% above the UT average of 3.4 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents who lose too much weight
4.4%
↑ 31% · UT 3.4This facility: 4.4, 31% above the UT average of 3.4 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Depressive symptoms
Percent of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms
12.7%
↓ 23% · UT 16.5This facility: 12.7, 23% below the UT average of 16.5 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms
12.7%
↓ 23% · UT 16.5This facility: 12.7, 23% below the UT average of 16.5 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Antipsychotic use
Percent of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
2.8%
↓ 80% · UT 14.2This facility: 2.8, 80% below the UT average of 14.2 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
2.8%
↓ 80% · UT 14.2This facility: 2.8, 80% below the UT average of 14.2 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Preventive care
Pneumococcal vaccine
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
100.0%
↑ 3% · UT 97.4This facility: 100.0, 3% above the UT average of 97.4 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
100.0%
↑ 3% · UT 97.4This facility: 100.0, 3% above the UT average of 97.4 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Flu vaccine
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
98.0%
≈ 0% · UT 98.0This facility: 98.0, level with the UT average of 98.0 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
98.0%
≈ 0% · UT 98.0This facility: 98.0, level with the UT average of 98.0 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Short-stay residents
Rehab and recovery after a hospital stay · 5 measures
Daily care & independence
Returned home or to the community
Rate of successful return to home or community from a skilled nursing facility.
55.3%
↑ 9% · US 50.6This facility: 55.3, 9% above the US average of 50.6 (among US facilities reporting a recent figure).
Rate of successful return to home or community from a skilled nursing facility.
55.3%
↑ 9% · US 50.6This facility: 55.3, 9% above the US average of 50.6 (among US facilities reporting a recent figure).Safety & clinical stability
Falls with major injury
Percentage of SNF residents who experience falls with major injury during their stay.
0.0%
↓ 100% · US 0.8This facility: 0.0, 100% below the US average of 0.8 (among US facilities reporting a recent figure).
Percentage of SNF residents who experience falls with major injury during their stay.
0.0%
↓ 100% · US 0.8This facility: 0.0, 100% below the US average of 0.8 (among US facilities reporting a recent figure).Physical & mental health
New antipsychotic medication
Percent of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication
0.0%
↓ 100% · UT 0.9This facility: 0.0, 100% below the UT average of 0.9 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication
0.0%
↓ 100% · UT 0.9This facility: 0.0, 100% below the UT average of 0.9 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Preventive care
Pneumococcal vaccine
Percent of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
99.4%
↑ 6% · UT 93.8This facility: 99.4, 6% above the UT average of 93.8 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
99.4%
↑ 6% · UT 93.8This facility: 99.4, 6% above the UT average of 93.8 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Flu vaccine
Percent of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
91.8%
↑ 1% · UT 91.0This facility: 91.8, 1% above the UT average of 91.0 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
91.8%
↑ 1% · UT 91.0This facility: 91.8, 1% above the UT average of 91.0 (among UT facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Arrows show whether a figure is above or below the average. Green is better for residents, red is worse, and yellow means within 5% of the average. Grey compares with the US average only, because CMS publishes no state figure. The line on each bar marks the average.
Quality measures are calculated by CMS from Minimum Data Set (MDS) resident assessments and Medicare claims.
Money and staffing.
Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine’s finances from its CMS cost report for the fiscal year ending June 2025, compared with 70 Utah nursing homes that filed a recent report. Includes all financial data for this property, which could include management/ownership changes.
FY Jun 2025
Is it financially stable?
Losing money on care, but less than last year
−24.8% operating margin
+25.2 pts vs prior year
An operating loss in 7 of the last 8 reported years. Other income ($0.0M) trims the net loss to −$3.1M. Watch for cost-cutting that reaches staffing.
Does it invest in staff?
Spends less on payroll than most Utah homes
44.9% payroll share of revenue
UT average 51.2%Rank #47 / 68Payroll % of net patient revenue — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 47th out of 68 nursing homes we track in Utah for payroll % of net patient revenue. Shows payroll as a percentage of net patient revenue versus the Utah average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Below 25% may signal understaffing or heavy agency use — read with Staffing ratings. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Utah that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
Payroll rose $0.2M while revenue fell $0.9M. A low share can mean leaner staffing; check hours per resident in the staffing section.
FY 2025 scorecard
Each row shows the FY 2025 figure, the change since the prior report, the trend, and how it compares with Utah homes.
Revenue & profit
Losing money on care
| Metric | FY 2025 | vs prior year | Trend 2018 → 2025Trend | UT median | Compared with UT homesRank in UT | In short |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net patient revenue What the home earns from resident care, after discounts and bad debt. | $5.0M | −$0.9M | Trend 20182025 | UT median $8.1M | Rank in UT Rank #64 / 70Net patient revenue — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 64th out of 70 nursing homes we track in Utah for net patient revenue. Shows this facility's net patient revenue compared to the Utah average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Higher revenue generally means more resources for staffing and capital — read alongside Payroll %. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Utah that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. Higher than 9% of homes | Below UT median Higher net patient revenue than 9% of UT homes that filed a recent report. Revenue mostly follows how big a home is. |
| Operating expenses Everything it costs to run the home: staff, supplies, rent, admin. | $6.2M | −$2.5M | Trend 20182025 | UT median — | Rank in UT Not ranked | Exceeds revenue Operating expenses are higher than net patient revenue, so resident care runs at a loss. |
| Net patient income Revenue minus operating expenses. Negative means care loses money. | −$1.2M | +$1.7M | Trend 20182025 | UT median — | Rank in UT Not ranked | Loss, narrowing Resident care lost money this year, less than in the prior report. |
| Operating margin Net patient income as a share of revenue. The clearest health signal. | −24.8% | +25.2 pts | Trend 20182025 | UT median — | Rank in UT Not ranked | Loss A negative margin means resident care costs more than it earns. |
| Other income Money not from resident care: investments, grants, services. | $0.0M | — | Trend — | UT median — | Rank in UT Not ranked | Offsets part of the loss Income from outside resident care covers part of the loss on care. |
| Net income The bottom line after other income. | −$3.1M | −$2.9M | Trend — | UT median — | Rank in UT Not ranked | Loss The bottom line is below zero even after other income. |
Staffing spend
Spends less of revenue on staff than most Utah homes
| Metric | FY 2025 | vs prior year | Trend 2018 → 2025Trend | UT median | Compared with UT homesRank in UT | In short |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Payroll costs Salaries and wage-related benefits, not counting contract labor. | $2.2M | +$0.2M | Trend 20182025 | UT median $4.2M | Rank in UT Rank #63 / 70Payroll costs — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 63rd out of 70 nursing homes we track in Utah for payroll costs. Shows total staff payroll — salaries plus wage-related benefits — benchmarked to the Utah average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Higher payroll relative to peers often signals better staffing and less reliance on contract labor. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Utah that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. Higher than 10% of homes | Below UT median Higher payroll than 10% of UT homes. Payroll in dollars mostly follows how big a home is, so this compares size, not staffing levels. |
| Payroll share of revenue Payroll divided by revenue. Higher usually means more staff per resident. | 44.9% | +10.2 pts | Trend 20182025 | UT median 49.6% | Rank in UT Rank #47 / 68Payroll % of net patient revenue — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 47th out of 68 nursing homes we track in Utah for payroll % of net patient revenue. Shows payroll as a percentage of net patient revenue versus the Utah average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Below 25% may signal understaffing or heavy agency use — read with Staffing ratings. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Utah that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric. Higher than 31% of homes | 6.3 pts under UT average The UT average is 51.2% of revenue. Within 3 points of it reads as near the average. |
Charts, 2018–2025 2 charts · UT benchmark drawn as a dashed line
Revenue, expenses and income
What the home earned from resident care (net patient revenue), what it cost to run (operating expenses) and the difference between the two (net patient income), for each fiscal year it filed a CMS cost report.
USD, millions
Net patient revenue Operating expenses Net patient income
Where revenue goes
Both lines are a share of net patient revenue. Payroll share is what goes to salaries and wage-related benefits; operating margin is what is left after every operating cost (below 0%, resident care lost money). The dashed line is the Utah payroll average.
% of net patient revenue
Payroll share Operating margin UT payroll average
Year-by-year data, 2018–2025 every reported year · latest first, scroll sideways
| Metric | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net patient revenue | $4.0M | $6.0M | $5.6M | $5.2M | $5.2M | $5.2M | $5.8M | $5.0M |
| Operating expenses | $5.8M | $5.9M | $6.2M | $6.0M | $6.6M | $7.3M | $8.7M | $6.2M |
| Net patient income | −$1.7M | $0.1M | −$0.6M | −$0.8M | −$1.3M | −$2.1M | −$2.9M | −$1.2M |
| Operating margin | −42.6% | 2.5% | −9.8% | −15.1% | −25.2% | −40.2% | −50.0% | −24.8% |
| Net income | −$0.7M | $0.0M | $0.3M | $0.8M | −$0.4M | −$0.7M | −$0.2M | −$3.1M |
| Payroll costs | $2.2M | $2.0M | $2.2M | $2.5M | $2.3M | $2.1M | $2.0M | $2.2M |
| Payroll share of revenue | 53.8% | 32.7% | 38.6% | 48.0% | 43.9% | 41.0% | 34.7% | 44.9% |
| Beds | 61 | 61 | 61 | 61 | 61 | 61 | 61 | 61 |
| Gross revenue | $4.0M | $11.1M | $5.6M | $9.8M | $9.8M | $9.2M | $9.7M | $8.0M |
| Salaries | $1.8M | $1.6M | $1.8M | $2.2M | $2.0M | $1.9M | $1.8M | $2.0M |
| Wage-related costs | $0.4M | $0.3M | $0.3M | $0.3M | $0.3M | $0.2M | $0.2M | $0.2M |
| Contract labor | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Other operating costs | $3.6M | $3.9M | $4.0M | $3.5M | $4.3M | $5.2M | $6.7M | $4.0M |
| Net patient revenue per day | $234 | $325 | $285 | $298 | $296 | $314 | $315 | $319 |
| Cost per day | $333 | $317 | $313 | $343 | $371 | $440 | $472 | $398 |
| Average length of stay | 77.6 days | 69.2 days | 77.1 days | 137.4 days | 94.3 days | 85.5 days | 294.1 days | 225.7 days |
Showing 2025–2023 · scroll sideways for 5 earlier years
Earlier and partial years are in the download. Download CSV
Who this home usually serves
Residents split by who pays for their care: Medicare, Medicaid, or private pay and other sources.
Over a year: CMS SNF Cost Report, FY2025
Snapshot: CMS Long-Term Care Facility Characteristics (quarterly), Jun 2026
Arriving
100 admissions · FY2025
Residents admitted during the year.
Medicare
15 · 15%
Medicaid
38 · 38%
Private pay & other
47 · 47%
Resident snapshot
46 residents · Jun 2026
Residents counted on the date of the latest CMS report, which updates quarterly.
Medicare
2 · 4%
Medicaid
29 · 63%
Private pay & other
15 · 33%
Leaving
69 discharges · FY2025
Residents discharged during the year.
Medicare
11 · 16%
Medicaid
25 · 36%
Private pay & other
33 · 48%
Mix of rehab and long-term care
This home supports both short-term rehab and long-term care, with residents staying for a wide range of durations.
Places of interest near Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine
1.8 miles from city center
Estimated distance in miles from Murray's city center to Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine's address, calculated via Google Maps.
Calculate Travel Distance to Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine
Add your location
Compare Nursing Homes around the area
Info below is compiled from CMS reports & the UT Dept. of Health & Human Services (DHHS), senior community websites & trusted data sources such as Walk Score & BBB.
Communities are listed from highest-ranked to lowest-ranked based on our methodology.
The facility name. Click to view the full profile page on Assisted Living Magazine, including photos, services, and contact info.
|
CMS (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the federal agency that regulates nursing homes) Overall 5-star rating — a composite of Health Inspection, Staffing, and Quality Measures scores. 5 stars = top 10% nationally. 1 star = bottom 10%. The single most important number to start with when comparing facilities.
|
Care Types in This Table
NH (Nursing Home):
24/7 skilled nursing care for residents with complex, ongoing medical needs.
SNF (Skilled Nursing Facility):
Round-the-clock nursing care, often for recovery after surgery, injury, or illness.
MC (Memory Care):
Secured, specialized care for people living with Alzheimer's or dementia.
RC (Respite Care):
Short-term temporary care that gives family caregivers a break.
|
Neighborhood or city area where the facility is located. Proximity to family, hospitals, and green space matters for both quality of life and ease of visitation. Consider drive time and transit access when evaluating location.
|
Licensed bed capacity. Larger facilities (300+ beds) often have more specialized programs but can feel institutional. Smaller homes (under 150 beds) tend to deliver more personalized care. Compare with Avg Res/Day to understand how full the facility typically runs.
|
A 0–100 score of a facility's regulatory inspection record, shown as a letter and compared with other facilities of the same kind in the same state. This is a proprietary Assisted Living Magazine grade. It is not a government rating. A dash means we have no inspection data for that facility.
|
Percentage of licensed beds filled on an average day. Color indicates financial health: green (90%+) = operationally strong, typically profitable. Amber (80–89%) = stable but leaving revenue on the table. Orange (70–79%) = financial strain likely, may struggle with fixed costs. Red (<70%) = significant distress, closure or ownership change risk increases sharply.
|
This facility's occupancy rate compared to the statewide average for similar facilities. A positive number means above-average demand. Facilities running 5%+ above the state average are typically the most sought-after in their market — a strong proxy for reputation.
|
CMS-adjusted total nurse hours per resident per day (RN + LPN + CNA combined). The national average is approximately 3.5 hrs. Higher is better — more direct care time per resident. Below 3.0 is a red flag. CMS weights RN hours more heavily because RNs handle complex clinical decisions that CNAs cannot.
|
CMS Health Inspection star rating (1–5 stars), based on the 3 most recent annual state surveys plus any complaint investigations. This is the hardest rating to manipulate — it reflects real surveyor findings on-site. 5 stars = fewest deficiencies found. 1 star = most. It carries the heaviest weight in the Overall CMS rating.
|
CMS Staffing star rating (1–5 stars), based on daily nurse staffing hours submitted to CMS via verified payroll data. Compares RN, LPN, and CNA coverage relative to resident acuity level. 5 stars = well above expected staffing. Weekend staffing is evaluated separately, as that's where many facilities quietly reduce coverage.
|
CMS Quality Measures star rating (1–5 stars), based on 15 clinical outcome metrics including fall rates, pressure ulcers, antipsychotic drug use, and hospital readmissions. Captures actual resident health outcomes, not just compliance. High QM combined with low Health Inspection scores can indicate a facility with strong care but weak documentation practices.
|
Registered Nurse hours per resident/day compared to the statewide average. RNs are the highest-skilled nursing staff — they assess residents, manage medications, and respond to emergencies. A value of +50% means RN coverage is 50% above the state norm. Negative values are a concern for residents with complex or acute medical needs.
|
Total nursing staff hours (RN + LPN + CNA combined) per resident/day vs. the statewide average. A broader measure than RN vs State — it captures the entire care team. A facility can have high total staffing but low RN hours, meaning more aides and fewer nurses. Read both columns together for the full picture.
|
Total dollar amount of federal monetary fines (civil money penalties) issued by CMS in the past 3 years. Fines are only levied for serious violations — typically actual harm to residents, repeated uncorrected deficiencies, or systemic non-compliance. Even a single fine is noteworthy. Multiple fines strongly suggest a pattern, not isolated incidents.
|
Total health deficiency citations from the most recent standard inspection cycle. Minor citations (scope A–C) are common and often administrative in nature. Higher counts aren't always disqualifying, but should be read alongside Severe Citations to understand actual harm levels. Under 10 is strong for a large facility; 30+ warrants a closer look.
|
Average deficiency citations per CMS inspection (survey) in the reporting window — total citations divided by the number of inspections. Lower is better; compare alongside total Citations and Severe Citations for context.
|
Citations at CMS scope/severity level G or higher — G–I means actual harm occurred; J–L means residents were placed in immediate jeopardy. (D–F is potential for harm only). Examples include unaddressed falls, medication errors causing injury, neglect, or abuse.
|
Average number of residents in the building on any given day, derived from annual census data. Reflects true operating scale — a 400-bed facility running 200 residents/day operates very differently from one at 390. Higher resident counts generally mean more funded staffing hours.
|
Better Business Bureau rating (A+ to F). Reflects complaint history, business transparency, and how family disputes were resolved. A+ means no significant unresolved complaints. A blank (—) means the facility isn't BBB-accredited, which is common for healthcare providers and not necessarily a negative signal.
|
Walk Score® (0–100). Measures walkability of the surrounding area. 90–100 = Walker's Paradise. 70–89 = Very Walkable. 50–69 = Somewhat Walkable. Below 50 = Car-Dependent. Higher scores benefit family visitors, resident outings, and staff commuting.
|
The licensed owner or operator of record filed with CMS — the individual or organization legally accountable for the facility. Searching the operator name across other facilities can reveal chain or multi-site ownership, which matters: chain-operated homes tend to have more variable quality outcomes than independently run facilities.
|
What the home actually collects for resident care, after contractual allowances, bad debt and discounts — not gross billings. Taken from the latest complete annual cost report, so it is comparable across homes reporting the same period. Revenue alone doesn't indicate care quality, but it funds staffing and capital reinvestment. Pair with Payroll %. Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
Staff salaries plus wage-related benefits from the latest complete annual cost report. Contract and agency labour is counted separately, under other operating costs, so a home leaning on agency staff can show a low figure here. Payroll is the cost most directly tied to care quality — compare with Payroll % for full context. Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
Payroll as a share of NET PATIENT REVENUE (not gross revenue). Both figures come from the same cost-report year. A higher figure means more of each revenue dollar goes to staff pay. Read with the Staffing star rating to judge whether spend translates into coverage — and note that homes whose patient revenue covers only part of their operation can read implausibly high. The Utah average is: 51.2% Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
CMS Certification Number: the unique federal identifier for this skilled nursing provider.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| William E. Christoffersen Salt Lake Veterans Home | NH MC RC SNF | Salt Lake City (University) | 81
Facility
81
UT AVG
94
Rank
#43 / 72 | A+ |
90.7%
Facility
90.7%
UT AVG
71.4%
Rank
#11 / 58 | +27% | 5.76
Facility
5.76
UT AVG
3.82
Rank
#4 / 68 | +32% | +51% | $8.3k
Facility
$8.3k
UT AVG
$43.9k
Rank
#38 / 74 | 12
Facility
12
UT AVG
27.3
Rank
#8 / 73 | 3.0
Facility
3.0
UT AVG
7.8
Rank
#3 / 73 | 1 | 74 | - |
39
Facility
39
UT AVG
52
Rank
#56 / 81 | Avalon Va Management LLC | $13.0MFiscal year ending 06/2025
Facility
$13.0MFiscal year ending 06/2025
UT AVG
$9.5M
Rank
#17 / 70 | $7.3MFiscal year ending 06/2025
Facility
$7.3MFiscal year ending 06/2025
UT AVG
$4.7M
Rank
#12 / 70 | 55.8%Fiscal year ending 06/2025
Facility
55.8%Fiscal year ending 06/2025
UT AVG
51.2%
Rank
#21 / 68 | 465150 | ||||
| Advanced Health Care of St George | NH SNF | Saint George | 100
Facility
100
UT AVG
94
Rank
#29 / 72 | A+ |
39.9%
Facility
39.9%
UT AVG
71.4%
Rank
#52 / 58 | -44% | 4.70
Facility
4.70
UT AVG
3.82
Rank
#10 / 68 | -16% | +23% | $0
Facility
$0
UT AVG
$43.9k
Rank
#1 / 74 | 8
Facility
8
UT AVG
27.3
Rank
#3 / 73 | 4.0
Facility
4.0
UT AVG
7.8
Rank
#10 / 73 | - | 40 | - |
26
Facility
26
UT AVG
52
Rank
#67 / 81 | Jason Swigert | $7.6MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$7.6MFiscal year ending 12/2024
UT AVG
$9.5M
Rank
#40 / 70 | $3.7MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$3.7MFiscal year ending 12/2024
UT AVG
$4.7M
Rank
#42 / 70 | 48.2%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
48.2%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
UT AVG
51.2%
Rank
#40 / 68 | 465190 | ||||
| Pointe Meadows Health and Rehabilitation | NH MC SNF | Lehi | 99
Facility
99
UT AVG
94
Rank
#33 / 72 | A- |
84.2%
Facility
84.2%
UT AVG
71.4%
Rank
#20 / 58 | +18% | 3.52
Facility
3.52
UT AVG
3.82
Rank
#23 / 68 | -6% | -8% | $0
Facility
$0
UT AVG
$43.9k
Rank
#1 / 74 | 22
Facility
22
UT AVG
27.3
Rank
#32 / 73 | 7.3
Facility
7.3
UT AVG
7.8
Rank
#40 / 73 | - | 83 | - |
70
Facility
70
UT AVG
52
Rank
#22 / 81 | Pointe Meadow Healthcare Inc | $13.2MFiscal year ending 06/2025
Facility
$13.2MFiscal year ending 06/2025
UT AVG
$9.5M
Rank
#15 / 70 | $7.5MFiscal year ending 06/2025
Facility
$7.5MFiscal year ending 06/2025
UT AVG
$4.7M
Rank
#9 / 70 | 56.7%Fiscal year ending 06/2025
Facility
56.7%Fiscal year ending 06/2025
UT AVG
51.2%
Rank
#19 / 68 | 465188 | ||||
| Pinnacle Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | NH MC SNF | North Price | 100
Facility
100
UT AVG
94
Rank
#29 / 72 | A- |
63.4%
Facility
63.4%
UT AVG
71.4%
Rank
#46 / 58 | -11% | 3.34
Facility
3.34
UT AVG
3.82
Rank
#37 / 68 | -10% | -12% | $0
Facility
$0
UT AVG
$43.9k
Rank
#1 / 74 | 15
Facility
15
UT AVG
27.3
Rank
#13 / 73 | 5.0
Facility
5.0
UT AVG
7.8
Rank
#21 / 73 | - | 63 | - |
71
Facility
71
UT AVG
52
Rank
#18 / 81 | Price Healthcare, Inc | $8.7MFiscal year ending 06/2025
Facility
$8.7MFiscal year ending 06/2025
UT AVG
$9.5M
Rank
#33 / 70 | $4.2MFiscal year ending 06/2025
Facility
$4.2MFiscal year ending 06/2025
UT AVG
$4.7M
Rank
#37 / 70 | 47.7%Fiscal year ending 06/2025
Facility
47.7%Fiscal year ending 06/2025
UT AVG
51.2%
Rank
#43 / 68 | 465098 | ||||
| Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine | NH SNF | Murray | 61
Facility
61
UT AVG
94
Rank
#51 / 72 | D |
72.1%
Facility
72.1%
UT AVG
71.4%
Rank
#50 / 58 | +1% | 3.14
Facility
3.14
UT AVG
3.82
Rank
#43 / 68 | +19% | -18% | $78.9k
Facility
$78.9k
UT AVG
$43.9k
Rank
#69 / 74 | 57
Facility
57
UT AVG
27.3
Rank
#65 / 73 | 8.1
Facility
8.1
UT AVG
7.8
Rank
#46 / 73 | 10 | 44 | F |
51
Facility
51
UT AVG
52
Rank
#47 / 81 | Rocky Mountain Care - Holladay, Inc | $5.0MFiscal year ending 06/2025
Facility
$5.0MFiscal year ending 06/2025
UT AVG
$9.5M
Rank
#64 / 70 | $2.2MFiscal year ending 06/2025
Facility
$2.2MFiscal year ending 06/2025
UT AVG
$4.7M
Rank
#63 / 70 | 44.9%Fiscal year ending 06/2025
Facility
44.9%Fiscal year ending 06/2025
UT AVG
51.2%
Rank
#47 / 68 | 465125 |
Rank badges are statewide and care-type specific: each nursing home is ranked against every other UT nursing home we track that reports that metric, not just the 5 on this page. See how we rank facilities
Frequently Asked Questions about Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine
Is Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine in a walkable area?
Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine has a walk score of 51. Somewhat walkable. Some errands can be accomplished on foot, with a mix of nearby amenities.
When does Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine's license expire?
According to UT state health department records, Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine's license expires on October 31, 2026.
What is the occupancy rate at Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine?
Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine's occupancy is 72.1%.
How long has Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine been in business?
Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine has been operating for approximately 35 years, based on available licensing and registration records.
Are pets allowed at Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine?
No, Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine has a no-pet policy.
Does Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine operate as a for-profit or non-profit?
Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine is registered as a for-profit in UT.
What is the overall rating for Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine?
Rocky Mountain Care – Cottage on Vine received a 3-star overall rating from the CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services). This score combines results from staffing levels, quality measures, and health inspections.
Guides for Better Senior Living
Care Cost Calculator: See Prices in Your Area
Nursing Home Data Explorer
Don’t Wait Too Long: 7 Red Flag Signs Your Parent Needs Assisted Living Now
The True Cost of Assisted Living in 2025 – And How Families Are Paying For It
Understanding Senior Living Costs: Pricing Models, Discounts & Financial Assistance
Updated on
