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

Aviata At Shoal Creek

500 Hospital Drive, Crestview, FL 32539 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 120 certified beds · (850) 689-3146 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited May 20234 immediate-jeopardy citations
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors cited 4 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
710 Hospital Dr · (850) 398-8480 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Walgreens0.3 mi
2350 S Ferdon Blvd · (850) 689-0447 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
ALDI0.2 mi
2680 S Ferdon Blvd Unit 201 · (855) 955-2534 · Call to confirm hours
Park
581 Brookmeade Dr · (850) 682-0789 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 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 1 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.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased9.0%8.7%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight8.9%5.5%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.3%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%0.7%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms13.9%4.6%6.5%worse
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.5%2.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened17.0%9.5%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication18.4%14.4%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%99.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.1%4.5%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control8.9%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 table24.0%8.6%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.5%1.5%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine99.1%94.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission21.1%26.1%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit8.0%9.1%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.152.131.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.521.151.80better

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.

51.3% 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 155 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

51.3%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
60.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.26U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.09hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.11hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 60.9% 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 92 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 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 36% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

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

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF51.3%CMS range 41.3–57.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.3%CMS range 8.5–15.110.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge60.9%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge54.4%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge47.8%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified99.3%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting98.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge96.9%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay1.4%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened2.1%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.5%CMS range 4.0–11.37.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.041.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

0.91
RN hours/ resident / day
0.37
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.09
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.37
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.79
RN hoursweekends
54.5%
Total nursing turnover
44.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 106.0 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 14 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 3.37 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.91 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.09 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 3.05 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.49 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.96 to 0.79 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 54% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-01-07)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-29)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2023-05-19 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — isolated
    Provide sufficient support personnel to safely and effectively carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service.
    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, record review, diet manual review and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure sufficient food and nutrition services support staff that had the appropriate competencies and skill sets to accurately prepare, plate and serve modified consistency diets for 2 of 5 residents sampled for mechanically altered diets (Resident #46 and Resident #278). This failure resulted on a choking incident on 05/06/2023 for Resident #46 when she was served an intact meat patty instead of the ground or pureed meat that she was ordered to receive. On Sunday 05/14/2023, the facility contracted Dietary Manager (Dining Services Director) was removed from the position and the rest of the food and nutrition services staff resigned at the same time. The contracting company immediately provided new food and nutrition services staff, many of whom were working in nearby nursing homes. The facility was unable to demonstrate how competencies were assured for the newly employed contracted food and…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2023-05-19 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolated
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, clinical record review, menu review, diet manual review, and policy review, the facility food and nutrition services staff failed to follow the Dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) Advanced Texture and Dysphagia Mechanically Altered diets for 2 of 5 residents sampled for mechanically altered diets (Resident #46 and Resident #278). On 05/06/2023 Resident #46 was served the incorrect diet texture during the lunch meal which resulted in the resident choking on a meat patty necessitating the immediate medical intervention of abdominal thrusts by a Registered Nurse (RN) to clear the meat from the resident's airway. On 05/17/2023, Resident #278, who was ordered a Dysphagia Mechanically Altered diet, did not receive the correct diet texture during the dinner meal. Resident #278 was ordered to receive pureed bread, but instead received a whole hamburger bun. At the time of the survey, the facility census was 112 with 29 residents who had orders for mechanically altered diets.…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2023-05-19 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual 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 meal observation, staff interview, resident interview, clinical record review, review of the diet manual, and policy review, the facility failed to prepare and serve food designed to meet individual needs for 2 of 2 residents sampled who required mechanically altered diets (Residents #46 and #278). Resident #46 had diet orders for ground meat due to dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). On 05/06/2023, Resident #46 was served a whole hamburger patty and had a subsequent choking event requiring abdominal thrusts to remove airway blockage. Resident #46 had diet orders for a Dysphagia Advanced diet which required all meats to be mechanically altered by chopping or grinding methods. On the evening of 05/17/2023, Resident #278 was served a sandwich with whole slices of bread for dinner. Resident #278's meal ticket had diet orders for a Dysphagia Mechanically Altered diet which requires all breads to be pureed. At the time of the survey, the facility census was 112 with 29 residents who had orders 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2023-05-19 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolated
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, clinical record review, review of the quality assurance performance plan, and policy review, the facility failed to implement their corrective action plan for educating staff on ensuring the residents were served the correct diets as ordered for 2 of 5 residents selected for modified texture diets. (Resident #46 and #278). On 05/6/2023, Resident #46 was served the incorrect diet texture during the lunch meal that resulted in the resident choking on a meat patty, necessitating the Heimlich Maneuver (abdominal thrusts) by Registered Nurse (RN) D in order to clear the meat from the resident's airway. On 05/08/2023, the facility developed an immediate corrective action plan which included education of nursing and food and nutrition services staff on diet textures and consistency, and ensuring the correct diet was served to the residents, but review of the training documentation revealed the nursing staff was not trained on diet textures until 05/17/2023 and food and nutrition…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-07 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolated
    Provide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on record reviews and interview, the facility failed follow the physician orders for lab services for 1 of 5 residents sampled for medication review. (Resident #6)The findings include:On 1/6/25. a record review was conducted for Resident #6, who has diagnoses including Dementia, Major Depressive Disorder, and Schizophrenia. A physician order dated 11/6/24 included obtaining a fasting Depakote Level every May and November. A review of lab results in the electronic medical record (EMR) revealed there was no documentation of a Depakote level since 6/6/2025. (Photographic evidence obtained)On 1/7/25 at approximately 9:40 AM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON). The DON stated the lab was not completed, and a stat fasting Depakote level was ordered today.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    Procure 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, policy review, and interviews, the facility failed to discard spoiled foods and failed to store food in a sanitary manner that is in accordance with professional standards to prevent foodborne illness.The findings include:On 01/04/26 at approximately 10:45AM, during the initial kitchen tour, there was an unopened zip lock bag observed in the walk-in cooler on a shelf dated 12/21/26 containing chicken patties. There were bananas stored in their original produce box sitting directly on the walk-in cooler floor that had brown to black discoloration on the banana peels. There were also 9 medium size tomatoes that appeared wrinkled and shriveled loose in a worn and wet cardboard produce box.On 01/04/26 at 10:40 AM, an interview was conducted with Staff A, a Kitchen Aide. She reported she was not aware that food is not to be stored directly onto walk-in cooler floor and was not sure how to store food properly in the walk in cooler or freezer. A record review on 01/04/2026 revealed a facility policy, dated 4/2018, that indicated that all food items must be stored at…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-08-29 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and staff interview, the facility failed to provide housekeeping and maintenance services to maintain a clean and orderly environment for 7 of 26 sampled resident rooms. (Rooms 701, 703, 705, 706, 707, 708, and 710) The findings include: A tour of the 700 hall was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON) on 8/28/24 at 3:12 PM. The following items were observed: Resident #42's wheelchair frame was heavily soiled with dust. room [ROOM NUMBER] had 5 wash basins under the sink on the floor in the bathroom stacked on top of each other. The basins were not labeled or bagged. Resident #20's left wheelchair arm was in disrepair with exposed inner foam. room [ROOM NUMBER]B's overbed table border was missing and the table had rough edges. room [ROOM NUMBER]'s bathroom had 2 wash basins not bagged or labeled and stacked on top of each other on a shelf. room [ROOM NUMBER]'s bathroom had a bedpan sitting in a wash basin on the floor that was not labeled or bagged. room [ROOM NUMBER] had basins on…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-29 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolated
    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 observations, staff interviews, review of the electronic medical record (EMR), and review of the facilities policies and procedures for individual activities, the facility failed to provide recreational activities designed to meet the interests of and support the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for one of one resident sampled for activities. (Resident #4) The findings include: Observations: On 08/26/24 at approximately 01:23 PM, Resident #4 was seen sitting in a wheelchair at the nurses' station not engaged with any activities and with her eyes closed. On 08/27/24 at approximately 10:41 AM, Resident #4 was seen lying in bed with eyes closed. The resident does not have a TV but a radio/CD player is observed on the nightstand, but it is not on. On 08/27/24 at approximately 04:01 PM, Resident #4 was observed lying in bed with eyes closed, but the music was not on. On 08/28/24 at approximately 08:38 AM, Resident #4 was observed sitting in a reclining broda chair at the nurses station. Both…

    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 · D2024-08-29 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the provider documented a resident specific rationale for declination of a pharmacist's request for a gradual dose reduction for a psychotropic medication for 1 of 5 sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Resident #25) The findings include: A review of Resident #25's medical record revealed a Consultant Pharmacist Medication Regimen Review dated 7/10/24. The physician recommendation stated the resident had been receiving Paxil (an anti-depressant) 40 mg, 1 tablet by mouth one time a day, starting in January 2024. This review states, If an anti-depressant is used for sleep or to manage behavior, stabilize mood, or treat a psychiatric disorder, it must be reviewed for a possible gradual dose reduction in an effort to find the lowest effective dose. If a dose reduction is deemed clinically contraindicated at this time, please state the rationale below and the risk versus benefit of continuing the drug at the current dose. The physician's response stated to continue the medication…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-05-19 · tag F0645 — pattern
    PASARR 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 Resident #2 On 5/15/23, a record review was conducted for Resident #2. The resident, admitted on [DATE], had diagnoses of major depressive disorder, general anxiety disorder and vascular dementia. The PASARR dated 9/18/20, did not list these diagnosis. The facility did not correct the PASARR upon admission and had not updated the form at the time of this survey. On 5/17/23 at approximately 3:49 PM, an interview was conducted with the DON who stated she does the PASARR if the resident comes from home or a hospice. If they come from the hospitals, they usually come in with a PASARR already completed. The DON stated that they always review to make sure the PASARRs are appropriate and completed and signed. The DON stated she doesn't know who was in charge of it back in 2020, so she can't say who missed it or why it was missed and verbally agreed the PASARR was not accurate and was missing the relevant diagnoses. Based on staff interview and record review, the facility failed to accurately complete the Level I…

    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 · E2023-05-19 · tag F0800 — pattern
    Provide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that meets his or her daily nutritional and special dietary 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 observations, resident and staff interviews, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to provide 6 of 7 residents sampled with palatable meals and snacks that took resident preferences into consideration (Residents #49, #8, #63, #278, #26, and #34). The findings include: Resident #49: On 05/15/2023 at approximately 11:20 AM, an interview with conducted with Resident #49 who talked about concerns regarding poor food quality and preparation. Resident #49 stated, the milk has been served curdled, there aren't enough snacks for the residents, we have several diabetics without any juice on the hall, they don't keep the nutrition room stocked, if I ask one of the Certified Nursing Assistants (CNA) for it, they try to bring it if they have them, but they usually don't have any. The food is ill prepared, the meat is too tough to cut much less chew. Residents are receiving the wrong diets, one (identified Resident #46) even choked on her food because they gave her regular food instead of pureed,…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-05-19 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure 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 observations, interviews, record reviews of temperature logs, maintenance logs, and policy review, the facility failed to maintain 1 of 2 ice machines and 2 of 2 nourishment room refrigerators located on A and B wing, in a sanitary and safe operating condition. The unsanitary condition of the ice machine represented a potential source of pathogen exposure to all residents served ice. Inadequate temperature control of residents' food during refrigeration indicates an unsafe food storage practice that can promote bacterial growth thereby increasing the nursing home residents' risk of food borne illness. The findings include: On 05/15/2023 at approximately 10:50 AM, an observation of the kitchen ice machine with District Dietary Manager F (District DM F) revealed an external surface that was unclean with unknown dark colored residue build-up and calcification present. The storage bin on the interior of the ice machine had the same type of residue as on the exterior surface. This residue appeared to be from an external leak, and, based on the amount of build-up, appeared 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-05-19 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on staff interviews, clinical record reviews, and review of facility investigations, the facility failed to submit federal immediate reports for 2 of 2 residents sampled for abuse reporting (Residents #46 and #76). The facility failed to report an allegation of neglect for Resident #46 in May 2023, and an allegation of resident to resident abuse for Resident #76 in January 2023. The findings include: Resident #46: On 05/18/2023 at approximately 12:36 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON) who stated that, on 05/06/2023, Resident #46 was in the independent dining room eating lunch and talking and chewing at the same time, that is kind of her normal behavior. One of the bites she took she started talking and got a piece of food stuck. The nurse in the dining room responded and performed the Heimlich and was able to get the food dislodged. The DON further stated that, during their investigation of the event, they identified that the resident was served a hamburger patty. The DON confirmed that Resident #46's diet at the time of the incident was…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-05-19 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, resident interviews, staff interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide appropriate wound care and treatment for 1 of 1 residents sampled for non-pressure related skin conditions. (Resident #34) The findings include: On 05/15/2023 at approximately 11:00 AM, an observation was made of a dressing to Resident #34's left forearm. The dressing was not dated, timed, or initialed. When the resident was asked what the dressing was for, she stated, this wound has been there for 5 days and has only been changed once, I bumped my arm on the wall. On 05/16/2023 at approximately 1:49 PM, a second observation was made of a dressing to Resident #34's left forearm with no date, time, or initials. The dressing appeared to be the same dressing noted on the prior observation and was stained and lifted on one side. The resident confirmed that it was the same dressing and it had not been changed. When asked if staff assessed the area or offered to change it, the resident stated, no. A review of resident #34's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed no current…

    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.

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to AVIATA HEALTH GROUP — 50 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 52.4+1.6 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.0+2.0 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.7+0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.1≈ chain avg
The other 49 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.4★, per CMS)
1 of 5Aspire At EvansFort Myers, FL 1 of 5Aviata At BenevaSarasota, FL 1 of 5Aviata At Big BendPerry, FL 1 of 5Aviata At Bryan DairyLargo, FL 1 of 5Aviata At FletcherTampa, FL 1 of 5Aviata At Palma Sola BayBradenton, FL 1 of 5Aviata At Saint LucieFort Pierce, FL 1 of 5Aviata At SarasotaSarasota, FL 1 of 5Aviata At SeminoleSeminole, FL 1 of 5Aviata At The BayTampa, FL 1 of 5Aviata At The PalmsPalm Harbor, FL 1 of 5Aviata At VeniceVenice, FL 2 of 5Aviata At Arbor SpringsOcala, FL 2 of 5Aviata At BradentonBradenton, FL 2 of 5Aviata At BrentwoodLecanto, FL 2 of 5Aviata At Colonial LakesWinter Garden, FL 2 of 5Aviata At EnglewoodEnglewood, FL 2 of 5Aviata At Grand OaksPalm Coast, FL 2 of 5Aviata At Green Cove SpringsGreen Cove Springs, FL 2 of 5Aviata At GreenacresGreen Acres, FL 2 of 5Aviata At Lakeside OaksDunedin, FL 2 of 5Aviata At OakfieldBrandon, FL 2 of 5Aviata At Santa BarbaraCape Coral, FL 2 of 5Aviata At South DaytonaSouth Daytona, FL 2 of 5Aviata At TallahasseeTallahassee, FL 2 of 5Aviata At The HarborSafety Harbor, FL 2 of 5Aviata At The Sea - PasadenaSouth Pasadena, FL 2 of 5Aviata At The Sea - Pompano BeachPompano Beach, FL 2 of 5Aviata At West Palm BeachWest Palm Beach, FL 2 of 5Aviata at Sand KeyClearwater, FL 3 of 5Aspire At Ridge HavenNew Port Richey, FL 3 of 5Aviata At BrooksvilleBrooksville, FL 3 of 5Aviata At Central ParkBrandon, FL 3 of 5Aviata At Coral BayWest Palm Beach, FL 3 of 5Aviata At CountrysidePalm Harbor, FL 3 of 5Aviata At JacksonvilleJacksonville, FL 3 of 5Aviata At North Fort MyersN Ft Myers, FL 3 of 5Aviata At RosewoodOrlando, FL 3 of 5Aviata At San JoseJacksonville, FL 3 of 5Aviata At St CloudSaint Cloud, FL

Showing 40 of 49; lowest-rated first.

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
500 HOSPITAL DR OPCO PARENT LLCOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 12/01/2023
500 HOSPITAL DR OPCO HOLDCO LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 12/01/2023
FREUND, NOCHUMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/01/2023
CHRISTOPHER, INDUMATHIIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/05/2023
RIMMER, ANTHONYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2023
DAGAN, AMITAIIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
GOLDBERGER, ABRAHAMIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
GOLDBERGER, FAIGYIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
HERSKOWITZ, ELIEZERIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
HERSKOWITZ, YAAKOVIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
TRAVITSKY, AARONIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
ASPIRE MGT LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2023

CMS files one row per role, so the 15 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

3 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.

$4.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-8.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$251K
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 73%Medicare 9%Other / private 18%

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 $251K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

$303per resident / day
operating cost
$9,208per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$279per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in FL

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 106028. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-07, 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.

What to do next