Clermont Health And Rehabilitation Center
151 E Minnehaha Ave, Clermont, FL 34711 · Non profit - Corporation · 182 certified beds · (352) 394-2188 Medicare & Medicaid certified
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — 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
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (20% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 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 3 to 4 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 | 12.6% | 8.7% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.9% | 5.5% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.1% | 0.3% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.5% | 0.7% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.3% | 4.6% | 6.5% | better |
| 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 | 1.4% | 2.5% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 15.1% | 9.5% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 16.6% | 14.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 99.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.0% | 4.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 3.8% | 10.5% | 21.2% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 6.7% | 8.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.2% | 1.5% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 94.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 30.6% | 26.1% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 3.7% | 9.1% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.71 | 2.13 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.98 | 1.15 | 1.80 | better |
‡ 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.
38.5% 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 133 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 52.1% 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 121 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 0.56 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 86% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 35% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 38.5%CMS range 31.3–48.5 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 8.4%CMS range 5.8–11.8 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | 52.1% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 55.4% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 38.8% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 99.5% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 stay | 0.5% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 12.3%CMS range 7.8–17.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.31 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 182 beds and averages 174.5 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 8 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 3.35 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.65 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.07 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 3.11 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.45 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.71 to 0.52 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 20% 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
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.
14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · E2025-08-07 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure insulin was administered as ordered by physician for 4 of 8 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Residents #1, #183, #72, and #102), and failed to ensure hypotensive medication was administered as per the parameters ordered by physician for 1 of 8 residents reviewed (Resident #27). Findings include: 1) Review of Resident #1's physician order dated 2/24/2025 read, Insulin Glargine-yfgn Subcutaneous Solution 100 UNIT/ML [milliliters] (Insulin Glargine-yfgn), Inject 30 unit subcutaneously two times a day for DM [Diabetes Mellitus] Give in morning and HS [Hour of Sleep]. Review of Resident #1's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for May 2025 for administration of Insulin Glargine-yfgn showed code 11 (insulin not required) was documented on 5/3/2025 at 8:00 AM, 5/13/2025 at 8:00 AM, 5/17/2025 at 8:00 AM, 5/23/2025 at 8:00 AM, and 5/30/2025 at 8:00 AM, and code 5 (hold/see nurses notes) was documented on 5/9/2025 at 8:00 AM and 5/27/2025 at 8:00 AM. Review of Resident #1’s nursing progress…
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 · D2025-08-07 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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 ensure proper positioning while tube feeding for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for tube feeding (Resident #40).Findings include: During an observation on 8/4/2025 at 9:19 AM, Resident #40 was lying in bed with the mattress flat and tube feeding pump running at 50 milliliters per hour. Resident #40 had her head on a pillow and the rest of her body was flat on the mattress. Review of Resident #40's physician order dated 7/30/2025 read, Enteral feed order every shift PEG [Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy] tube Feed: Glucerna 1.5 Cal [calorie] Continuous via tube to infuse at a rate of 50 ml/hr [milliliter/hour]. Total volume of 1100 ml infused in 22 Hours. Hang feed at 1900 [7:00 PM]. May turn off for care/services. Verify infusing Q [every] shift. Clear pump when total volume has infused. Review of Resident #40's physician order dated 6/11/2025 read, Elevate head of bed while feeding and medication is being administered every shift every shift for prevention. During an interview on 8/4/2025 at 9:25 AM, Staff 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-07 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure 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
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the physician documented the rationale for disagreement with the pharmacist's recommendation for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Resident #58). Findings include: Review of Resident #58's pharmacy review titled Note to Attending Physician/Prescriber dated 6/12/2025 read, 1. Can PRN [as needed] Geri-Tussin DM [Dextromethorphan] be discontinued due to non-use? No. 2. Can PRN Loperamide be discontinued due to non-use? No. 3. Can PRN Meclizine be discontinued due to non-use? No. 4. Can PRN Midodrine be discontinued due to non-use? No. 5. Can PRN Tramadol be discontinued due to non-use? No. Physician/Prescriber response: Disagree. Provide Rationale [Blank]. The document was signed by the Medical Doctor #4. During an interview on 8/7/2025 at 8:34 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) stated, I receive monthly pharmacy reviews and sometimes in between. For short stay residents, we send over a pharmacy review request, the pharmacist looks the medications over and sees if anything needs to be discontinued…
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 · Dcited before2025-08-07 · 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medical records were complete and accurate for antidiabetic medication administration for 1 of 8 residents reviewed for medication management (Resident #34).Findings include: Review of Resident #34's physician order dated 8/14/2024 read, Monitor BS [Blood Sugar] every 12 hours for PRN [as needed] glipizide two times a day for PRN glipizide, Administer is [Sic.] BS is greater than 180. Review of Resident #34's physician order dated 2/8/2025 read, Glipizide Oral Tablet 10 MG [milligram] (Glipizide), Give 1 tablet by mouth every 12 hours as needed for DM [Diabetes Mellitus], Give if blood sugar is greater than 180. Review of Resident #34's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for June 2025 for monitoring blood sugar showed blood sugar was documented as 223 at 8:00 AM, and 224 at 8:00 PM on 6/2/2025; 336 at 8:00 AM, and 247 at 8:00 PM on 6/3/2025; 310 at 8:00 AM on 6/7/2025; 203 at 8:00 AM on 6/8/2025; 260 at 8:00 PM on 6/9/2025; 238 at 8:00 AM, and 232 at 8:00 PM on 6/10/2025; 316 at 8:00 AM on 6/11/2025; 266 at 8:00…
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 · Dcited before2025-08-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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 ensure a resident (Resident #192) was placed on contact precautions and failed to ensure staff used appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and performed hand hygiene while providing care to the residents on contact precautions to prevent the possible spread of infection and communicable diseases. Findings include: During an interview on 8/5/2025 at 11:50 AM, Resident #192 stated, I have an infection. It's MRSA [Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus]. They [staff members] don't wear any gowns or anything when they help me. During an observation on 8/4/2025 at 11:50 AM, there was no contact isolation signage on the Resident #192'r room door. Review of Resident 192's nursing progress note dated 8/1/2025 read, Resident admitted to the facility via wheelchair. Female patient [AGE] years old with diagnosis of COPD [Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease], asthma, respiratory failure, aortic stenosis. Resident on oxygen 2L [liters]…
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 · E2024-05-02 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 Minimum Data Set (MDS) was accurate for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for discharge, Residents #174 and #175. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #174's records showed the resident was discharged on 1/31/2024 to home. Review of Resident #174's Discharge Return Not Anticipated MDS dated [DATE] showed the resident was discharged to short-term general hospital. During an interview on 5/2/2024 at 12:00 PM, the MDS Director stated the documented discharge of Resident #174 to short term general hospital was incorrect and Resident #174's discharge should have been documented as to community. 2. Review of Resident #175's records showed the resident was discharged on 2/9/2024 to home. Review of Resident #175's Discharge Return Not Anticipated MDS dated [DATE] showed an unplanned type of discharge. During an interview on 5/2/2024 at 11:53 AM, the MDS Director stated Resident #175's MDS was incorrect under section A 310 G- type of discharge and should have…
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 · E2024-05-02 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
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 ensure residents received oxygen as per physician order for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for respiratory care, Residents #139, and #154. Findings include: 1. During an observation on 4/29/2024 at 11:01 AM, Resident #139 was in bed, receiving oxygen via nasal canula at 3 liters per minute (LPM). During an observation on 4/30/2024 at 9:53 AM, Resident #139 was in bed, receiving oxygen via nasal canula at 3 LPM. Review of Resident #139's physician orders showed the order dated 4/8/2024 for administration of oxygen at 2 LPM via nasal cannula as needed for shortness of breath. During an interview on 4/30/2024 at 9:55 AM, Resident #139 stated, The nurse turns my oxygen on and off for me. I do not adjust it. During an interview on 4/30/2024 at 10:00 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the oxygen concentrator was set at 3 LPM for Resident #139 and verified the physician order for Resident #139 to receive oxygen at 2 LPM. 2. During an observation on 4/29/2024 at 11:45 AM, Resident #154 was in bed, receiving…
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 · D2024-05-02 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
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 ensure residents had a safe and homelike environment in 2 of 3 residential units, 200 Unit and 300 Unit (Photographic evidence obtained). Findings include: During an observation on 4/29/2024 at 9:31 AM, the rubber baseboard molding (a trim used to cover the bottom few inches of the wall) was separated from the wall on the right side of Resident #144's bed. During an observation on 4/29/2024 at 11:09 AM, the rubber transition floor strip (covers floor gaps where two-floor surfaces meet) from the hallway into Resident #78's room, had a quarter-size gap between broken pieces of the strip. During an interview on 4/29/2024 at 11:10 AM, the Maintenance Director stated, There are a lot of things needing repair on this floor. A resident could fall if we don't fix it [pointing to the rubber transition floor strip for Resident #78's room). Staff need to report these things when they see it. During an observation on 4/29/2024 at 11:27 AM, the rubber transition floor strip from the hallway into Residents #19 and #427's…
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 · D2024-05-02 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
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 residents received appropriate urinary catheter care, and failed to ensure urinary flow into the urinary catheter bag was maintained for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for incontinence care, Resident #165. Findings include: Review of Resident #165's admission record showed the resident was most recently admitted on [DATE] with the diagnoses including urinary tract infection, type 2 diabetes mellitus with unspecified complications, hydronephrosis and neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder. Review of Resident #165's physician order dated 3/18/2024 read, Suprapubic Catheter: Suprapubic catheter to drainage bag for DX [diagnosis] Neurogenic bladder, suprapubic catheter size #18F [French] with 30 cc [cubic centimeters] balloon. Observe Q [every] shift for observation. Review of Resident #165's care plan dated 3/4/2024 read, Focus: Suprapubic Catheter. The resident uses a suprapubic catheter with risk for infection and/or complications related…
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 · Dcited before2024-05-02 · 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 record review, the facility failed to ensure foods were stored in a safe and sanitary manner in the main kitchen of the facility. Findings include: During an observation while conducting a tour of the main kitchen on 4/29/2024 at 9:30 AM, with the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM), there were two unlabeled and undated 2.5-gallon buckets of yellowish liquid on the second shelf of the main walk-in cooler, one 4-inch steam pan with a purple jelly like substance on the second shelf of the main walk-in cooler with no label to identify the contents and an expiration date of 4/23/2024, and one opened undated bag of plant-based chicken nugget on the third shelf of the walk-in cooler. During an interview on 4/29/2024 at 9:30 AM, the CDM confirmed the unlabeled and undated food items in the walk-in cooler, and stated, Everything in here should have a label and an expiration date sticker placed on it before storing it. Review of the facility policy and procedure titled Storage with an effective date of January 2023 and a review date of 1/5/2024, showed 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-02 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
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 ensure staff performed hand hygiene during medication administration and failed to ensure staff followed infection control standards of practice for administration of subcutaneous medications to help prevent the possible transmission of infection and communicable diseases. Findings include: During an observation on 4/30/2024 at 8:05 AM, Staff B, Registered Nurse (RN), unlocked the medication cart and began preparing medication for Resident #118. Staff B did not perform hand hygiene. Staff B compared the individual medication packet to the physician's orders, poured the medications including Amlodipine 10 mg (milligram) tablet, Escitalopram 10 mg tablet, Buspirone 7.5 mg tablet, Carvedilol 3.125 mg tablet, Aspirin 81 mg Capsule, Iron 325 mg tablet, Vitamin B12 100 mcg (microgram) tablet, Vitamin D 125 mcg capsule, Raw Enzyme tablet, and Losartan 100 mg tablet into a single medication cup for oral administration, and returned each packet to the drawer. Without performing hand hygiene, Staff B locked 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-01-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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 record review, the facility failed to ensure foods in the refrigerator/freezer were covered, dated, labeled, and shelved to allow circulation, failed to ensure the equipment was in good condition, and failed to ensure the kitchen and food service equipment were clean. Findings include: On 1/3/2023 at 8:46 AM, during a tour of four nourishment rooms including C-1, C-2, C-3, and post-acute areas with the Registered Dietician (RD), there were outdated or undated open products of juices, milk, nutritional drinks, and thickened water (Photographic evidence obtained). On 1/3/2023 at 9:16 AM, during an initial tour of the refrigerator, freezer and stock-room located in the kitchen with the RD, the following were observed: 1. a buildup of what appeared to be food particles and spills in the microwave, 2. dust and grease build up under the stove hood vent and on the light covers, 3. open boxes of raw cookie dough with open flaps exposing food items and a buildup of ice on the back wall and floor in the freezer, 4. food items with no use by date or…
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 · Dcited before2023-01-06 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain accurate and complete medical records for 1 of 3 sampled residents, Resident #32. Findings include: Review of the medical records for Resident #32 revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with the diagnoses including osteomyelitis of vertebra, sacral and sacrococcygeal region, immobility syndrome, unspecified severe protein calorie malnutrition, local infection of the skin and subcutaneous tissue, methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus infections as the cause of disease classified elsewhere, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, emphysema, pressure ulcer of sacral region, stage 4 pressure ulcer of left hip, other lack of coordination, dislocation of thoracic 12 lumbar 1 vertebra sequela, paraplegia, polyneuropathy, neuromuscular dysfunction, hyperlipidemia, anemia, other injury of unspecified body region, sepsis due to methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus, obstructive and reflux uropathy, colostomy, resistance to…
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 · Dcited before2023-01-06 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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 2. Review of the medical records for Resident #32 revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] with the diagnoses including osteomyelitis of vertebra, sacral and sacrococcygeal region, immobility syndrome, unspecified severe protein calorie malnutrition, local infection of the skin and subcutaneous tissue, methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus infections as the cause of disease classified elsewhere, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, emphysema, pressure ulcer of sacral region, stage 4 pressure ulcer of left hip, other lack of coordination, dislocation of thoracic 12 lumbar 1 vertebra sequela, paraplegia, polyneuropathy, neuromuscular dysfunction, hyperlipidemia, anemia, other injury of unspecified body region, sepsis due to methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus, obstructive and reflux uropathy, colostomy, resistance to multiple antibiotics, stage 4 pressure ulcer of left buttock, unstageable pressure ulcer of left heel, unstageable pressure ulcer of right heel, essential hypertension, presence of…
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.
“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.
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ORLANDO REHABILITATION GROUP , INC. | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 11/15/2010 |
| DUDLEY, NATE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2012 |
| GARNER, ALVIN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2012 |
| JAFFE, HOWARD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2012 |
| MULLEN, ANN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2012 |
| ROMBOLD, LORI | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2012 |
| ANU HEALTH MANAGEMENT LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/16/2025 |
| CONSULTING SUPPORT SERVICES, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/16/2025 |
| FACILITY SUPPORT COMPANY, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/25/2025 |
| KANE FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/25/2025 |
| EDWARDS, LISA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/10/2018 |
| LINGENFELTER, STACY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/12/2019 |
| SELECT REHABILITATION, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/19/2016 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 20 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
6 organizational owners 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.
About 73% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $296K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). 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
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.
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 105512. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-07, 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.