Vivo Healthcare Clewiston

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

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.

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.

43.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 52 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 60.4% 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 53 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 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 47% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 30% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 155 beds and averages 116.9 residents a day — about 75% occupied, or roughly 38 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.47 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.38 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.20 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 3.24 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.56 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.43 to 0.28 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

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.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

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.

17 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2025-04-07 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  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 staff interviews the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from neglect for 1 (Resident #999) of 4 sampled residents by failing to ensure staff follow safety precautions while providing care to prevent avoidable falls and fall related major injury. The findings included: Review of the facility's neglect investigations revealed on 4/1/25 at approximately 6:40 p.m., Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) Staff A was providing care to Resident #999. The CNA turned the resident on his left side to remove his brief. The resident moved more off the bed as she placed her hand on his side to hold him he went falling. The incident investigation noted Resident #999 sustained a red discoloration to the right side of his face and a skin tear on his right hand. Resident #999 was transferred to a local hospital and diagnosed with an acute intra-axial hemorrhage (bleeding) within the left frontal lobe (front of the brain) measuring 2.0 by 1.07 by 2.4 centimeters. The investigation…

  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
• Actual harm · G2025-04-07 · 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 record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the safety interventions were documented in the care plan and failed to ensure staff used safe repositioning technique to prevent avoidable fall and fall related serious injury for 1 (Resident #999) of 4 dependent residents reviewed. The findings included: Review of the clinical record revealed Resident #999 was a [AGE] year-old male with an admission date of 2/14/25. Diagnoses included right side hemiparesis (weakness on one side of the body) and hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body) related to Cerebral Vascular Accident, Osteoporosis, and a history of falls. Review of the New admission Evaluation form dated 2/14/25 revealed Resident #999 required the physical assistance of two persons for bed mobility. The care plan initiated on 3/21/25 identified Resident #999 was at risk for falls related to decreased cognition and decreased mobility. The resident had activity of daily living self-care performance deficit due 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-06-18 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
  Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on review of the clinical record, review of facility policy and procedure and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure freedom from significant medication error for 1 (Resident #999) of 3 residents reviewed for accuracy of medications. Failure to administer medications accurately puts residents at risk for adverse health consequences.The findings included:Review of facility provided policy and procedure titled Medication Administration with a date implemented of 9/2023 and a date reviewed/revised of 1/2026 revealed, Medications are administered by licensed nurses, or other staff who are legally authorized to do so in this state, as ordered by the physician and in accordance with professional standards of practice . Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: . Review MAR (Medication Administration Record) to identify medication to be administered. Compare medication source (bubble pack, vial, etc.) with MAR to verify resident name, medication name, form, dose, route, and time. Refer to drug reference material if unfamiliar with the medication, including its mechanism…

  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 plan of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-04-11 · tag F0638 — pattern
  Assure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 months.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure completion of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) within 92 days from the assessment reference date of the last completed assessment for 14 (Resident #7, #17, #41, #45, #62, #66, #67, #72, #73, #79, #82, #84, #88, and #91} of 14 residents sampled. This had the potential to delay assessment and revision of the plan of care. Quarterly assessments are used to track a resident's status between comprehensive assessments to ensure critical indicators of gradual change in a resident's status are monitored. The findings included: On record review for Resident #7s Minimum Data Set Assessments (MDS) revealed the resident has an admission assessment done on 8/20/23 and did not have their next Quarterly assessment coded and completed for 164 days. The assessment was completed by the facilities MDS coordinator on 1/31/24. Then Signed off by RN (Registered Nurse) Assessment Coordinator Verifying Assessment Completion on 2/1/24. Transmitted to CMS (Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services) on 2/7/24. On record review 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-04-11 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
  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 observation, review of the clinical record, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide the necessary care and services to maintain personal hygiene for 2 (Residents #81 and #303) of 3 residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). The findings included: The facility policy Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Supporting documented Residents will be provided with care, treatment and services as appropriate to maintain or improve their ability to carry out ADL's . Appropriate care and services will be provided for residents who are unable to carry out ADL's independently, with the consent of the resident and in accordance with the plan of care. 1. Review of the clinical record revealed Resident #81 had a readmission date of 8/10/23 with diagnoses including pacemaker, hypertension, adjustment disorder, right eye prosthesis, history of falls and Alzheimer's disease. The Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) (standardized assessment tool that measures health status in nursing home…

  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 · Ecited before2024-04-11 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — pattern
  Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
  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, record review, facility policy review, resident and staff interview, the facility failed to provide an ongoing program of activities to meet the resident's interests and support the resident physical, mental and psychosocial well-being for 4 (Residents #8, #42 #51 and #82) of 4 residents reviewed for involvement in the activity program. The lack of an ongoing activity program could lead to a decline in the residents' self-esteem, physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. The findings included: Review of the undated Activity Programs policy revealed the activity programs were designed to meet the interests of and the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident. The activities program was provided to support the well-being of each resident and to encourage both independence and community interaction. The activity program was ongoing and included facility-organized group activities, independent individual activities and assisted individual activities. All activities…

  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 · D2024-04-11 · tag F0636 — isolated
  Assess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
  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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive assessment accurately reflect the dental status of 2 (Residents #39 and #90) of 14 sampled residents. The findings included: 1. Review of the clinical record for Resident #39 revealed an admission date of 6/2/21, and a readmission date of 8/9/23. An outside provider's screening report for dental services for Resident #39 dated 1/25/23 noted, Upper and lower edentulous (no teeth) with two asymptomatic root tips. The admission Nursing Comprehensive Evaluation dated 8/9/23 noted Resident #39 did not have dentures and was missing some teeth. The admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment with a target date of 8/14/23 was not checked off for No natural teeth or tooth fragment(s). On 4/10/24 at 10:00 a.m., Resident #39 was observed to be edentulous with two teeth broken below the gum line on his bottom jaw. On 4/10/24 at 1:09 p.m., in an interview the MDS Coordinator said she uses the documentation in the nursing…

  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 · D2024-04-11 · tag F0640 — isolated
  Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure completion and transmission of completed resident Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) data to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) System Within 14 days after a facility completes a resident's assessment for 2 (Resident #17 and 82) of 14 residents reviewed. The findings included: Record review for Resident #17's Minimum Data Set Assessments (MDS) revealed the resident has an admission assessment done on 8/19/23 and did not have their next Quarterly assessment coded and completed for 130 days. The assessment was completed by the facilities MDS coordinator on 12/27/23. Then Signed off by the Registered Nurse (RN) Assessment Coordinator verifying Assessment Completion on 12/27/23. Then transmitted to CMS on 1/2/24. Record review for Resident #82's Minimum Data Set Assessments (MDS) revealed the resident had an admission assessment done on 8/20/23 and did not have their next Quarterly assessment coded and completed for 183 days. The assessment was completed by the facilities MDS coordinator on 2/19/24.…

  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 · D2024-04-11 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide 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

  Based on observation, review of facility policy and procedures, record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain urinary catheters in a safe and sanitary manner for 1(Resident #303) of 3 residents reviewed with an indwelling urinary catheter. The findings included: The facility policy Catheter Care documented It is the policy of this facility to ensure that residents with indwelling catheters receive appropriate catheter care and maintain their dignity and privacy when indwelling catheters are in use. Privacy bags will be available and catheter drainage bags will be covered at all times while in use. Review of the clinical record documented Resident #303 had an admission date of 3/13/24 with diagnoses including urinary retention. The care plan for Resident #303 initiated on 4/10/24 identified the resident had an indwelling catheter (catheter inserted in the bladder to drain urine) with the goal she would have no signs or symptoms of a urinary tract infection. On 4/8/24 at 10:06 a.m., Resident #303 was in her room in bed and was observed to have an indwelling…

  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 · Dcited before2024-04-11 · tag F0700 — isolated
  Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
  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, review of facility policies and procedures, staff and resident interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure 3 (Residents #24, #42 and #100) of 29 residents with bed rails were assessed for alternative interventions prior to the use of bed rails, and failed to ensure residents were assessed for danger of entrapment prior to use of bed rails. In addition, the facility failed to inform the residents and/or their representative of the risks and benefits of bed rails or obtain an informed consent prior to use of the bed rails. The findings included: The facility policy Proper Use of Bed Rails documented, Appropriate alternative approaches are attempted prior to installing or using bed rails. If bed rails are used the facility ensures correct installation, use and maintenance of the rails. The resident assessment must include an evaluation of the alternatives that were attempted prior to the installation or use of a bed rail and how these alternatives failed to meet the residents'…

  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 · D2022-07-14 · 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 clinical record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan with goals and individualized interventions to meet the needs of 2 (Resident #22 and #81) of 26 sampled residents. The findings included: 1. On 7/11/22 at 3:46 p.m., a review of the clinical record showed Resident #22 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic respiratory failure and colon cancer. The Significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment with a target date of 4/14/22 noted Resident #22 was receiving hospice services. The clinical record lacked documentation of an individualized care plan to ensure collaboration of care between hospice and the facility. On 7/12/22 at 2:45 p.m., Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) Staff I said the facility worked closely with hospice to ensure services were not duplicated. After reviewing the clinical record, LPN Staff I verified the lack of a care plan addressing hospice services for Resident #22. She said Resident…

  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 · Dcited before2022-07-14 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide the necessary services to maintain the personal hygiene, grooming for 2 residents (Resident #34 and #53) of 4 residents who require assistance with activities of daily living. Daily grooming contributes to the resident's dignity and the failure of maintaining a resident's personal grooming habits has a potential to affect the psychosocial well-being of the resident. The findings included: 1. Review of Resident #53's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] severe cognitive impairment. The assessment documented the resident required limited physical assistance of one person for personal hygiene, including combing hair. Resident #53 range of motion was impaired on both upper extremities. The MDS noted Resident #53 did not reject care. Resident #53's care plan showed she was independent to limited assist with dressing, grooming, and bathing related to dementia. The goals were for the resident to have a clean, neat appearance…

  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

“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.

Fines & penalties

$33,248 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $33,248 — penalty dated 2025-04-07

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 VIVO HEALTHCARE — 12 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

8 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 84% 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 $2.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 24% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. 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

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