No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Harborview Health Center West Altamonte

1099 West Town Parkway, Altamonte Springs, FL 32714 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 116 certified beds · (407) 865-8000 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (407) 865-8000 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0607) — cited Mar 20233 actual-harm citations$18,106 in federal fines
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (33% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has 3 actual-harm citations
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (19) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $18,106 in federal fines (most recent 2024-10-17)
  • its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

2/5
CMS overall
2 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Urgent care / clinic
3840 E Semoran Blvd #1000 · (407) 478-3202 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
200 S State Road 434 · (407) 774-6255 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
340 S State Road 434 · (407) 682-1703 · Call to confirm hours
Park
371 San Sebastian Prado · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
385 S Pearl Lake Cswy · (855) 558-0507

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating2★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased12.1%8.7%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight0.0%5.5%5.4%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.3%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.6%0.7%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.3%4.6%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.0%2.5%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened8.4%9.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication7.9%14.4%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.8%99.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.0%4.5%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control14.6%10.5%21.2%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table1.7%8.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.3%1.5%1.4%typical
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine88.7%94.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission32.4%26.1%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.0%9.1%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.352.131.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.671.151.80better

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

33.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 72 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

33.4%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.5%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
38.8%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.20U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.06hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.09hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 38.8% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 80 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.20 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 23% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 17% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF33.4%CMS range 24.8–41.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.5%CMS range 7.0–14.410.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge38.8%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge33.8%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge43.8%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified91.3%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting85.3%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge90.5%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.9%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.7%CMS range 3.6–11.37.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.911.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.73
RN hours/ resident / day
0.73
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.10
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.56
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.49
RN hoursweekends
33.0%
Total nursing turnover
32.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 116 beds and averages 110.4 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.56 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.73 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.10 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.29 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.67 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.82 to 0.49 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 33% is below the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

9
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-10-17)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2023-03-09)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

19 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 6 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Actual harm · G2024-10-17 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide immediate and thorough nursing assessment and treatment services related to burns for 1 of 2 residents, (#27), and failed to obtain an order for treatment and date a treatment dressing for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for pressure wounds, (#84), of a total sample of 37 residents. The facility's failure to ensure a complete and timely assessment including accurate identification of burns resulted in actual harm. Resident #27 was transferred to a higher level of care initially for treatment and was transferred again to another hospital with a specialized burn unit. Resident #27 was admitted to the stepdown trauma unit with second degree burns to her left arm, left hand, abdomen and left thigh. She remained there for 5 days. Findings: Cross reference F689 and F813 1. Resident #27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include left sided hemiplegia and hemiparesis, type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2024-10-17 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to prevent an avoidable accident for a resident by not checking the temperature of microwaved noodles provided by staff for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for accidents, of a total sample of 37 residents, (#27). The facility's failure to provide a policy and ensure all staff were educated regarding the heating and reheating of resident food resulted in actual harm. Resident #27 was transferred to a higher level of care, then transferred again to another hospital with a specialized burn unit. Resident #27 was admitted to the stepdown trauma unit with second degree burns to her left arm, left hand, abdomen and left thigh. She remained in the hospital for 5 days. Findings: Cross reference F684 and F813 Resident #27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include left sided hemiplegia and hemiparesis (one sided weakness and paralysis), type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy (diabetic nerve damage), and contracture of the left hand. The…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2023-03-09 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement appropriate interventions to include provision of adequate supervision to prevent a fall with major injury for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for accidents, of a total sample of 31 residents, (#11). The facility's failure to increase supervision for a resident with a history of repeated falls resulted in actual harm for resident #11. Findings: Review of the medical record revealed resident #11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including seizures, dementia, anxiety, and hypertension. He was hospitalized on [DATE] after a fall with major injury and readmitted from the hospital on [DATE] with additional diagnoses of traumatic subdural hemorrhage, repeated falls, weakness and paralysis of the left side and visiospatial deficit and spatial neglect following a stroke. A subdural hemorrhage is bleeding between the covering and surface of the brain that is often the result of a severe head injury. Compression of the brain…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2026-04-08 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespread
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure implementation of their Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program by failing to obtain feedback and data to identify issues and concerns with facility systems, as well as opportunities for improvement.Findings:Cross Reference F580, F655, F656, F842In a joint interview with the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) and Director of Nursing (DON) on 4/08/26 at 4:53 PM, the NHA stated he had only been at the facility for two days and had not been part of any QAPI meetings. The DON expressed she had started last year in June of 2025. The NHA and DON acknowledged the concerns related to notification of change in condition for residents, incomplete and inaccurate baseline care plans, incomplete comprehensive care plans that did not include respiratory care, and incomplete/inaccurate medical records. The DON stated she was not aware of the concerns and there were no active Performance Improvement Plans (PIP) related to these concerns. She explained during morning clinical meetings, each department head…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-08 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's representative was informed of a change in condition for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for change in condition, (#1, and #4), and failed to notify the physician of the change in condition which had the potential to delay medical evaluation and treatment for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for notification of changes, (#4) .Findings: 1. Resident #1 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] from an acute care hospital with diagnoses that included metabolic encephalopathy (abnormal brain function), dysphagia (trouble swallowing), diabetes, sepsis, congestive heart failure, acute kidney failure, and adult failure to thrive. She was hospitalized on [DATE] due to a difficulty to arouse and labored breathing. Resident #1 returned to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of COVID-19, pneumonia, and acute respiratory failure. Review of the Agency for Healthcare Administration (AHCA) Long Term Care Medicaid Transfer form 3008, dated [DATE],…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-08 · tag F0655 — isolated
    Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the baseline care plan was effectively implemented to include a plan for staff to provide effective and person-centered care, for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care, (#1, and #3), and failed to ensure the resident or representative received a summary of the baseline care plan with the required information, for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for baseline care plans, (#1), of a total sample of 4 residents. Findings: 1. Resident #1 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] from an acute care hospital with diagnoses that included metabolic encephalopathy (brain dysfunction), diabetes, congestive heart failure, acute kidney failure, and adult failure to thrive. She was hospitalized on [DATE] due to a difficulty to arouse and labored breathing. Resident #1 returned to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), pneumonia, and acute respiratory failure. Review of the Agency for Healthcare Administration (AHCA)…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-08 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan to address oxygen use which placed the resident at risk for potential respiratory complications, for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for Comprehensive Assessment, of a total sample of 4 residents, (#2).Findings: Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. admission diagnoses included end stage liver disease, hepatocellular carcinoma (liver cancer), diastolic congestive heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes, and hypertension. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed resident #2 required oxygen therapy and had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15/15, which indicated she was cognitively intact. The assessment specified the resident required full assistance from staff with toileting, hygiene, and transfers. Review of resident #2's medical record revealed physician orders dated 12/23/25 for oxygen two liters per minute…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-08 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain complete, accurate, and consistent clinical records, compromising the reliability of the clinical record and the ability to ensure appropriate assessment, treatment, and continuity of care for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for resident records, of a total sample of 4 residents, (#1, #4).Findings: 1. Resident #1 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] from an acute care hospital with diagnoses that included metabolic encephalopathy (abnormal brain function), dysphagia (trouble swallowing), diabetes, sepsis, congestive heart failure, acute kidney failure, and adult failure to thrive. On [DATE] at 10:30 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) C confirmed she was the Night Supervisor on [DATE]. She recalled when she arrived for her shift that night, she was told by 3-11 PM staff that resident #1 had been found unresponsive by an unidentified Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) who had gone to the room to check on her. LPN C remembered the CNA…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-10-17 · tag F0813 — pattern
    Have a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a policy or training to staff regarding reheating of food for residents. This lack of instruction caused the resident to receive second degree burns when her food was heated in the microwave, for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for burns, of a total sample of 39 residents, (#27). Findings: Resident #27 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include left sided hemiplegia and hemiparesis (one sided paralysis and weakness), type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy (diabetic nerve damage), and contracture of the left hand. Review of a Nurse's Progress Note dated 10/02/24 at 7:33 PM, by Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) J revealed, the Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) notified him that resident #27 burned herself with a noodle soup that she was eating. He documented that, Upon assessment resident have a skin tear on left hand. No complaint of pain /discomfort. Physician notified as well her daughter. Per interview with the…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-10-17 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to treat residents with dignity and care to promote quality of life by standing while feeding them and referring to residents as feeders for 2 of 6 residents reviewed for assisted dining, of a total sample of 37, (#15 and #29). Findings: 1. On 10/16/24 at 9:45 AM, resident #15's assigned Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) D was observed in the residents room standing over the resident while feeding her. CNA D stated she was aware she was supposed to sit while feeding residents, but explained she was busy running from resident to resident and didn't get a chair. She stated she knew it was important to sit while assisting residents with their meals to be at eye level with them. On 10/16/24 at 12:41 PM, CNA C was observed as she delivered and set up the lunch tray in front of resident #15, then left the room. Two minutes later at 12:43 PM, resident #15 was observed eating the food from her lunch tray with her hands. At 12:44 PM, CNA D passed by…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-10-17 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) Level I evaluation was completed, (#33), and failed to request a Level I and/or Level II PASARR evaluation after a new major mental disorder diagnosis, (#65), for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for PASARR, of a total sample of 37. Findings: 1. Resident #33 was re-admitted to the facility from the hospital on 3/29/24 but was initially admitted on [DATE]. On admission she had diagnoses that included cerebral infarction stroke), aphasia (difficulty speaking), vascular dementia with other behavioral disturbances, major depressive disorder, and mood disorder. Review of Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed that resident #33 was severely cognitively impaired, had impairments to both upper and lower extremities limiting range of motion, was bedbound, and dependent for all activities of daily living (ADLs). Review of the medical record for resident #33 revealed a…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-10-17 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, record review, and facility's policy review, the facility failed to ensure care and services consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent pressure ulcers was provided, by failing to follow physician's order for weekly skin sweeps for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for pressure ulcer, of a total sample of 37 residents, (#42). Findings: Resident #42, a [AGE] year-old male was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and readmitted on [DATE]. His diagnoses included heart failure, cognitive communication deficit, diabetes type II, peripheral vascular disease, and malignant neoplasm (cancer) of the prostate. The resident's significant change Minimum Data Set assessment, with Assessment Reference Date of 9/08/24, revealed the resident's cognition was moderately impaired, with a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 10 out of 15. The assessment noted the resident had functional limitation in range of motion to one side of his lower extremity, was dependent on staff assistance for…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-10-17 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure respiratory therapy was provided as per physician orders for 1 out of 1 resident reviewed for respiratory care, of a total sample of 37 residents, (#93). Findings: Resident #93 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), heart disease, hyperlipidemia, hypotension, history of falling, cognitive communication deficit, ischemic cardiomyopathy, and essential hypertension. Review of the Significant Change Minimum Data Set assessment with reference date 5/29/24, revealed resident #93 had mild cognitive impairment, had no behaviors, nor refused care, and required the use of oxygen. Resident #93 was dependent for transfers and used a wheelchair for mobility. Review of resident #93's Physician Orders for continuous oxygen was 1 liter per minute (LPM) every shift for Shortness of breath. Resident #93 had a baseline Care Plan for required use of oxygen as ordered because of the…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 6 citations
  • Potential for harm · D2024-10-17 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to follow proper infection control practices to prevent cross-contamination during wound care for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for pressure ulcers, of a total sample of 37 residents, (#33). Findings: Resident #33 was re-admitted to the facility from the hospital on 3/29/24 with diagnoses that included cerebral infarction (stroke), vascular dementia, gastrostomy status, and multiple pressure ulcers. Review of Significant Change Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed that resident #33 was severely cognitively impaired, had impairments to both upper and lower extremities limiting range of motion, was bedbound, and dependent for all activities of daily living. She was at high risk for pressure ulcer development and at the time of the assessment had five facility acquired unstageable pressure ulcers. Review of resident #33's order summary report dated 10/17/24 revealed she had a wound order for the right buttocks. The physician orders…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-10-17 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolated
    Make sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a call device to allow residents to call for staff assistance for 2 of 18 residents observed for call lights, of a total sample of 37, (#30 and 55). Findings: 1. On 10/16/24 at 12:26 PM, resident #30, was observed in bed, alert and oriented to self and place. Resident #30's call device was a large, white square push/touch device seen on the nightstand on her right side, out of her reach. She stated she wanted to get out of bed and into her wheelchair. She then stated she didn't have a call device and had no way to reach staff for help. On 10/16/24 at 1:32 PM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) D verified resident #30's call device was located on the nightstand and was not accessible to the resident. The call bell, was a larger, flat device designed specifically for residents who had difficulty pressing a regular call device. She moved the call device from the night stand and wrapped the cord around the bedrail so it would stay in place. She educated the resident on how and when to use the call device…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-29 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide showers as scheduled, and as per resident's preference for 2 of 2 dependent residents reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADL), of a total sample of 6 residents, (#1, and #5). Findings: Resident #1, a 72 -year-old male was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with his most recent readmission on [DATE]. His diagnoses included traumatic subdural hemorrhage, peripheral vascular disease, diabetes type II, hemiplegia/ hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non dominant side, and dementia. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment with Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 2/27/24 revealed the resident's cognition was severely impaired with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 03 out of 15. The assessment indicated the resident was dependent on staff assistance for toileting hygiene, shower /bathe, and personal hygiene. The resident's care plan for ADL self-care performance deficit related to history…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-03-09 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
    Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement its policies and procedures to prevent Neglect related to investigation of a fall with major injury for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for accidents, from a total sample of 31 residents, (#11). Findings: Review of the medical record revealed resident #11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including seizures, dementia, anxiety, and hypertension. He was hospitalized on [DATE] after a fall with major injury and readmitted from the hospital on [DATE] with additional diagnoses of traumatic subdural hemorrhage, repeated falls, weakness and paralysis of the left side and visiospatial deficit and spatial neglect following a stroke. A subdural hemorrhage is bleeding between the covering and surface of the brain that is often the result of a severe head injury. Compression of the brain can cause brain injury or death (retrieved on 3/22/23 from www.medlineplus.gov). Visiospatial deficit and spatial neglect are common consequences of a…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-03-09 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow pharmaceutical procedures to ensure proper administration and accurate documentation of medications for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for medication administration, of a total sample of 31 residents, (#81). Findings: Review of the medical record revealed resident #81, an [AGE] year-old man, was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included malnutrition, cancer of the immune system, muscle weakness, and adult failure to thrive. The Minimum Data Set admission (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated resident #81 had moderate cognitive impairment, delusions, and disorganized thinking which fluctuated in severity. The MDS assessment also showed resident #81 did not reject care in the look back period. Review of resident #81's medical record revealed no care plan for self-administration of medications. His baseline care plan dated 2/06/23 read, No in the section designated for self-administration of medication. On 3/06/23…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-03-09 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure pharmacy recommendations that resulted from monthly Medication Regimen Reviews (MRRs) were addressed and signed by the physician for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for Unnecessary Medications, of a total sample of 31 residents, (#66 & #78). Findings: 1. Review of the medical record revealed resident #66 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including schizoaffective disorder, major depressive disorder, impulse disorder, insomnia, and seizures. Review of the resident's medical record revealed active medication orders included Trazodone 100 milligrams (mg) for schizoaffective disorder, ordered on 5/04/21; Zyprexa 5 mg for schizoaffective disorder, ordered on 8/18/22; and Tramadol 25 mg for pain, ordered on 7/11/22. Review of the record showed the monthly pharmacy MRR report dated 1/11/23 included the pharmacist's recommendations to evaluate the need for Tramadol and discontinue if appropriate, as the resident had not used it recently. A…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$18,106 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

  • $9,053 — penalty dated 2024-10-17
  • $9,053 — penalty dated 2024-10-17

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to HARBORVIEW HEALTH SYSTEMS — 22 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 2 of 51.9+0.1 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 52.1-0.1 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 52.4+1.6 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 52.3+0.7 vs chain
The other 21 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.9★, per CMS)

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
HARBORVIEW WEST ALTAMONTE HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 07/15/2024
GRIFFIN, MARIAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/15/2024
NURIEL, GABRIELIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/15/2024
LEIBOWITZ, CHAIMIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/15/2024
DAHAN, MICHELLEIndividualTRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 07/15/2024
ENGLANDER, SHMUELIndividualTRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 07/15/2024
KLEIN, JOSEPHIndividualTRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 07/15/2024
LEIBOWITZ, ELIYAHUIndividualTRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 07/15/2024
SOKOLOFF, RIVKAIndividualTRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 07/15/2024

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$10.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-17.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$680K
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 59%Medicare 8%Other / private 32%

This home reported $680K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$352per resident / day
operating cost
$10,696per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$300per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in FL

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Florida Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Florida
$10,342/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$12,167/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,610/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 105843. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-10-17, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next