Northwest Florida Community Hospital (snu)
1360 Brickyard Rd, Chipley, FL 32428 · For profit - Corporation · 34 certified beds · (850) 415-7400 Medicare only — no Medicaid
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it did not file the payroll staffing data CMS requires — its 1 of 5 staffing rating is the rating CMS assigns for not reporting, not a measure of how many nurses are on the floor
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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 5 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
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 | 3 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 improved from 4 to 5 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 5.4% | 8.7% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.0% | 5.5% | 5.4% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 5.6% | 0.7% | 2.0% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 18.5% | 4.6% | 6.5% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.8% | 2.5% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 11.8% | 9.5% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 30.7% | 14.4% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 99.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.2% | 4.5% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 16.3% | 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 table | 48.7% | 8.6% | 17.1% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 3.19 | 2.13 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.77 | 1.15 | 1.80 | worse |
* 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.
Staffing
No payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours are on file for this home — and the record suggests that is because it did not report them. CMS rates its staffing 1 of 5, which is the rating CMS assigns when a home does not report. Every Medicare-certified nursing home is required to submit its actual payroll data quarterly, and that submission is what makes staffing numbers auditable rather than a claim. A home that does not file is not the same as a home with no data yet: ask this home directly what its nurse-to-resident ratios and weekend RN coverage are, why its payroll data is not filed, and weigh the independent health-inspection score heavily in the meantime.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-02 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. The findings include:On the initial tour of the kitchen on 6/30/2025 at approximately 11:15 am, an observation was made in the produce refrigerator located in the hospital's kitchen. The General Manager was present for the tour. The following was found on shelves inside: Two pieces of cooked salmon were in a pan covered with plastic wrap with a handwritten label that stated 'Salmon 5/24/25, out 6/2/25'. A pan of cooked rice with a handwritten label dated 6/28/25. Cooked bacon was wrapped in plastic wrap and unlabeled. Sliced peaches in liquid were in a plastic wrap covered pan with a printed label that stated 'Prep 6/12/25 12:56 pm, Enjoy by 6/17/25 12:56 pm'. (Photographic evidence obtained)An interview was conducted with the Kitchen Supervisor on 6/30/25 at approximately 11:20 am about the process of cleaning and removing outdated food items from the refrigerators. When asked if the outdated food should have been removed, she…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-24 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to have accurate Advance Directive information on the medical chart for 2 of 4 residents sampled (Resident #19 and #23). The findings include: Resident #19: Resident #19 was observed to have a No Code sticker on the front of the medical chart. However, Resident #19's face sheet listed the resident as a full code dated 8/5/2024. On 5/19/23, the resident had signed a form saying he wished to be DNR (Do Not Resuscitate). On 09/23/24 at 04:50 PM, during an interview with Staff B, a registered nurse (RN), she was asked what No Code means. Staff B stated that the resident has chosen not to be resuscitated. When asked how new staff would find out the resident's advance directives, Staff B stated they were always instructed to look at the face sheet in the medical chart. On 09/24/24 at 12:21 PM, an interview with the facilities Minimum Data Set (MDS) coordinator was held. When asked about Resident #19's advance directives, the MDS coordinator stated this resident was a DNR. When shown that the record contained conflicting…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-24 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
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 observations, staff interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to store and discard medications properly for 3 of 20 patients observed. (Resident #8, #19, and #15) The findings include: Residents #8 and #19: On 09/24/24 at approximately 01:46 PM, an observation of the west hall medication cart revealed expired medications were present for two residents, Resident #8 and Resident #19. For Resident #8, it was observed that Lasix (a medication used to remove assess fluid from the body) 20mg tablets were present, although the tablets had an expiration date on 06/30/2024. A review of the physician's order revealed the medication was ordered on 10/20/2023 and was currently an active order. (photographic evidence obtained) For Resident #19, it was observed that Clonidine 0.1mg tablets for high blood pressure was present, although the packaging stated the tablets had expired on 08/31/2024. A review of the physician's order revealed the medication was ordered on 08/10/2020 and was currently an active…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-05 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
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 resident record review, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to refer a resident with a diagnosis of Dementia and a serious mental disorder for a PASRR (pre-admission screening and resident review) Level II evaluation for 1 of 2 sampled residents reviewed for PASRR. (Resident #16) The findings include: A review of the PASRR form for Resident #16 (dated 03/17/2021) noted an identified diagnosis of Anxiety Disorder and a primary diagnosis of Dementia. Per the PASRR form, the combination of a Serious Mental Illness (SMI) diagnosis and Dementia or neurocognitive disorder would trigger the requirement for the resident to receive a PASRR Level II evaluation. A review of the admission diagnosis in the medical record (dated 03/15/2021) noted diagnoses of Dementia, Depression, and Anxiety. On 10/21/2021, a diagnosis of Dementia with psychosis was added to Resident #16's list of diagnoses. A review of the Care Plan for Resident #16 revealed the resident was care planned 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-05 · tag F0740 — failed to provide behavioral / mental-health care — isolatedEnsure each resident must receive and the facility must provide necessary behavioral health care and services.
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 observations, interviews and record review the facility failed to provide behavior health services to maintain the highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well being for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for behavior services. (Resident #8) The findings include: On [DATE] at 1:18 PM, an observation was made of the Resident #8 in her room. The resident appeared depressed and withdrawn. The resident would answer questions with a simple yes or no. The resident would not make open conversation. On [DATE] at 9:35 AM, an observation was made of Resident #8 in the dining area. The resident was sitting in a chair with her eyes closed. The resident responded to verbal stimuli with simple yes or no answers. The resident was asked if she was happy. The resident indicated no. The resident indicated she feels alone. On [DATE], a record review was conducted for Resident #8. The records indicated the resident was on Lexapro 10mg PO once a day when admitted to facility. The admitting diagnoses did not list…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-10-05 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard 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
Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records by not including psychiatric visit records and psychiatric progress notes within the medical record for 2 of 2 residents reviewed. (Residents #8 and #12) The findings include: Resident #8 On 10/03/23 at 2:20 PM, a binder titled Psych Progress Notes was reviewed. The binder contained psychiatric notes for multiple residents. A note from a psychiatric visit on 1/26/23 was found for Resident #8 and was signed by the psychiatrist. The note indicated the resident was found to be currently stable with her depression. He reported the resident was sleeping well and eating well with no side effects from medication. He describes the resident's feelings of depressed mood as frequent, excessive worry is frequent, hopelessness is frequent. He also describes feelings of paranoia and racing thoughts as frequent. On 10/04/23 at 10:05 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON) and the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) regarding psychiatric notes not being part of the medical chart. 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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NFCH, INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 12/21/2012 |
| KOZAR, MICHAEL | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/04/2016 |
| LISENBY, STEVEN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 09/21/2020 |
| SMEDRA, IRA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 12/21/2012 |
| CLEMMONS, JAMES | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/10/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 7 rows in the source record cover these 5 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.
What families pay in FL
CMS lists this home as Medicare-certified only — it is not Medicaid-certified, so it generally cannot accept Medicaid as payment for a long-term stay. That makes it one of roughly 545 homes nationally where a Medicaid-funded placement is not an option. If you expect to rely on Medicaid, ask the home directly before you tour, and see the Florida Medicaid page for homes that do.
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 106055. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-02, 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.