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

Debary Health And Rehabilitation Center

60 N Hwy 17/92, Debary, FL 32713 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 120 certified beds · (386) 668-4426 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (386) 668-4426 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0610) — cited Feb 2022
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

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 harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • about 18% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

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) 4 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
602 Deltona Blvd · (386) 860-1402 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Walgreens0.6 mi
15 N Charles Richard Beall Blvd · (386) 668-4946 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
2 N Charles Richard Beall Blvd · (386) 668-8528 · Call to confirm hours
Park
135 Serena Rd · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
32 S Shell Rd · (386) 668-6881

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 held steady at 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating5★
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 increased9.4%8.7%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.7%5.5%5.4%typical
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 symptoms0.0%4.6%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
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 injury1.4%2.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened8.3%9.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication19.2%14.4%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%99.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.3%4.5%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control16.8%10.5%21.2%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table11.8%8.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.1%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.7%94.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission21.9%26.1%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit8.2%9.1%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.062.131.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.601.151.80better

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

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

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

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

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

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

53.8% 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 145 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

53.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
32.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.40U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.13hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.22hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 32.9% 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 70 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 0.40 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 69% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% 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 SNF53.8%CMS range 44.2–62.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.4%CMS range 8.3–14.810.7%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 discharge32.9%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 discharge20.0%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 discharge31.4%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 identified96.8%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 setting100.0%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 discharge97.9%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 stay0.8%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.8%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 hospitalization8.8%CMS range 5.8–12.67.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.191.02Oct 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

0.62
RN hours/ resident / day
0.80
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.05
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.47
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.51
RN hoursweekends
44.4%
Total nursing turnover
50.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 110.7 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 9 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 3.47 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.62 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.05 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 3.13 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.61 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.66 to 0.51 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% is about the same as 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

0
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-01-08)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-01-19)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-05 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — pattern
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, record reviews, and review of facility's bowel management process, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for three (Resident #1, #2, and Resident #4) of three residents reviewed for management of constipation, by failing to implement medical director's directive/order to administer stool softeners/laxatives. The findings include:1.Review of Resident #1's medical record revealed an admission date of 9/7/23, and a discharge date of 2/2/26. Her diagnoses included unspecified Sequelae of Cerebral Infarction, Cerebral Palsy, generalized anxiety disorder, and constipation, unspecified. Review of Resident #1's quarterly minimum data set assessment dated [DATE], noted the resident had a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 0 out of 15, indicating severe cognitive impairment. The resident was noted as always being incontinent of bowel and bladder.Review of the task for bowel movements for…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-19 · 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

    Based on observations, staff and resident interviews, medical record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide one dependent resident (#8) from a total sample of 35 residents, with services to carry out activities of daily living necessary to maintain appropriate grooming and personal hygiene. Resident #8 was not provided adequate fingernail care. The findings include: On 01/16/24 at 11:56 AM, Resident #8's hands were observed and his fingernails on both hands had jagged edges and brown matter underneath the fingernails. He was asked if staff provided his nailcare and he answered yes. (Photographic evidence obtained) On 01/17/24 at 9:06 AM, Resident #8 was observed in bed. His fingernails remained the same as observed on 01/16/24 at 11:56 AM, with jagged edges and some evidence of deterioration of the nailbeds on the 2nd and 3rd digits of the right hand. Resident #8 stated, I had fungus a long time ago. On 01/19/24 at 10:34 AM, an interview was conducted with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) C. The nurse was asked who was responsible for providing the…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-19 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that one (Resident #96) of 35 sampled residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the resident's plan of care and resident choices, based on the resident's and resident representative's desire to have bilateral compression stockings placed on lower extremities daily as ordered. The findings include: On 1/16/24 at 12:18 PM, Resident #96 was observed seated in his wheelchair. He was dressed in a long-sleeved shirt, long dark pants, and dark-colored crew socks. When greeted, he smiled and said hello. He was accompanied by his niece, who reported that she visited every day. When asked how the care at the facility had been, she stated He's ordered to wear compression stockings daily, but they never place them on him. I even purchased multiple pairs. The resident's niece pulled up Resident #96's pant legs to expose his lower extremities showing that he was not wearing bilateral…

    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 · D2024-01-19 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, medical record review, interviews, and review of the policy and procedure for Following Physicians' Orders (revised 1/2024), the facility failed to provide necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing for one (Resident #111) of two residents selected for pressure ulcer review, from a total sample of 35 residents. Resident #111 suffered deterioration of a sacral pressure wound which was facility-acquired. The findings include: An interview was conducted with Resident #111 and her son on 1/16/24 at 11:53 a.m. in her room. The resident was speaking with her son and was observed on a low air loss mattress with pillows on the bed and booties on both her feet. She reported having wounds on her sacrum and lower legs. The son reported the wound care nurse was great, but when she was off on weekends, no one completed the wound care. Both reported that the wound care physician was overseeing and caring for the wounds. On 1/17/24 at 9:00 a.m., Resident #111 was observed lying in bed and stated the wound care…

    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 · D2024-01-19 · 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

    Based on observations, staff and resident interviews, medical record review, and a review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure that two (Resident #56 and #94) of 35 residents in the total sample, were provided an environment as free of accident hazards as was possible. The findings include: On 01/16/24 at 11:44 AM, razors were observed at the sink in Resident #56's room. On 01/17/24 at 9:12 AM, four razors were observed rubberbanded together in a cup on the sink in Resident #56's room. (Photographic Evidence Obtained) On 01/19/24 at 8:57 AM, three razors were observed in an open cabinet at the sink in Resident #94's room. (Photographic Evidence Obtained) Resident #94 was asked if the razors belonged to him and he stated, yes. He was asked if the razors were usually stored in the cabinet at the sink and he replied, Yes. On 01/19/24 at 9:12 AM, an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) J. She was asked how sharps were managed at this facility and she replied, We dispose of sharps in the sharps container after use. She was asked to describe some examples 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-19 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, staff interviews, medical record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5 percent. Three errors were identified out of 26 opportunities for error, resulting in a medication error rate of 11%, involving two (Residents #50 and #99) of four residents observed during medication administration, from a total of 35 residents in the sample. The findings include: On 1/17/24 at 8:00 a.m., Nurse A was observed preparing medications for Resident #50. She pulled each medication according to the electronic Medication Administration Record (eMAR) and signed off each as she prepared the medications. She administered the medications, which were being given by mouth, to the resident. Upon returning to the medication cart, Nurse A was asked if she had completed this medication pass for Resident #50. She stated yes. She was asked if she had signed off all the medications on the eMAR for this resident. She stated yes. She was asked if she was going to prepare medications for the next resident at this time. She stated…

    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 · F2022-02-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    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 kitchen food service observations, staff interviews, facility document review, and facility policy and procedure review, the facility failed to follow proper sanitation and food handling practices to prevent the outbreak of foodborne illness. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure that the dietary staff were trained and knowledgeable about proper sanitation practices in the kitchen. Specific instruction on hand hygiene, food handling and sanitation is important in health care settings serving nursing home residents, due to the risk of serious complications from foodborne illness as a result of their compromised health status. Unsafe food handling practices represent a potential source of pathogen exposure. This failure potentially impacted every resident consuming food from the facility's kitchen. The findings include: A tour of the kitchen with the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) on 02/07/22 at 2:13 PM revealed: -On the refrigerator across from the tray line, the door handles were soiled and sticky with food debris, and the inner door of the refrigerator had dried…

    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 · D2022-02-10 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an allegation of sexual abuse by failing to promptly identify one (Resident #35) of nine hospice residents as a potential victim of an alleged perpetrator's actions. The findings include: A review of Resident #35's medical record revealed an admission date of 4/17/20. Her medical diagnoses included dementia, heart failure, and respiratory failure. A Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 11/30/2021, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12 out of a total 15 points possible, indicating moderately impaired cognition. Resident #35 required extensive to total assistance from staff with activities of daily living (ADLs) and was receiving hospice care. A psychiatric evaluation, dated 12/30/2021, indicated Resident #35 was alert and oriented to person, place and time. Her thought processes were documented as organized and she was noted with fluent speech. A review of facility documentation indicated that Resident #35 was not interviewed on 12/15/2021, the date…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-02-10 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to effectively manage a resident's pain, by failing to identify and respond to non-verbal indicators of pain for one resident (Resident #7) reviewed for pain management from a total sample of 35 residents. The findings include: A review of Resident #7's medical record, revealed an admission date of 6/6/2014. Her medical diagnoses included vascular dementia and cerebral infarction (stroke). Resident #7 also had a contracture of her left arm. A quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 2/1/2022, revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 02 from a total 15 possible points, indicating severely impaired cognition. Resident #7 required extensive to total assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) and received hospice services for end-of-life care. On 2/7/2022 at 12:13 p.m., Resident #7 was observed sitting in a reclining geri-chair in her room. The chair was reclined. She was grimacing, her brow was furrowed, and she was repeatedly whimpering. Resident #7 was not able to answer…

    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 ASTON HEALTH — 38 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 52.7+1.3 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.5+1.5 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 52.2+1.8 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.1≈ chain avg
The other 37 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.7★, per CMS)
1 of 5Crescent Health And Rehabilitation CenterSarasota, FL 1 of 5Kensington Gardens Rehab And Nursing CenterClearwater, FL 1 of 5Nursing & Rehabilitation Center Of New Port RicheyNew Port Richey, FL 1 of 5Oak Haven Rehab And Nursing CenterAuburndale, FL 1 of 5Vero Beach Care CenterVero Beach, FL 2 of 5Baya Pointe Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterLake City, FL 2 of 5Capri Health And Rehabilitation CenterVenice, FL 2 of 5Creekside Health And Rehabilitation CenterSarasota, FL 2 of 5Fairway Oaks CenterTampa, FL 2 of 5Flagler Health And Rehabilitation CenterBunnell, FL 2 of 5Haines City Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterHaines City, FL 2 of 5Highlands Lake CenterLakeland, FL 2 of 5Indian River CenterWest Melbourne, FL 2 of 5North Port Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterNorth Port, FL 2 of 5Pensacola Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterPensacola, FL 2 of 5Riverwood CenterJacksonville, FL 2 of 5Sandgate Gardens Rehab And Nursing CenterFort Pierce, FL 2 of 5Sea Breeze Rehab And Nursing CenterVero Beach, FL 2 of 5Tierra Pines CenterLargo, FL 2 of 5Viera Del Mar Health And Rehabilitation CenterViera, FL 2 of 5Winter Garden Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterWinter Garden, FL 3 of 5Cedarbrook Health And Rehabilitation CenterFort Myers, FL 3 of 5Coquina CenterOrmond Beach, FL 3 of 5Eagleridge Health And Rehabilitation CenterFort Myers, FL 3 of 5Fouraker Hills Rehab And Nursing CenterJacksonville, FL 3 of 5Hillside Health And Rehabilitation CenterZephyrhills, FL 3 of 5Oakpark Health And Rehabilitation CenterPalm Harbor, FL 4 of 5Bridgeview CenterOrmond Beach, FL 4 of 5Coastal Health And Rehabilitation CenterDaytona Beach, FL 4 of 5Fernandina Beach Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterFernandina Beach, FL 4 of 5Island Lake CenterLongwood, FL 4 of 5Meadowpark Health And Rehabilitation CenterDunedin, FL 4 of 5Parkside Health And Rehabilitation CenterDeland, FL 4 of 5Ruleme CenterEustis, FL 4 of 5Seaside Health And Rehabilitation CenterDaytona Beach, FL 5 of 5Bayview CenterEustis, FL 5 of 5Osprey Point Nursing CenterBushnell, FL

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
DEBARY MANOR OPERATIONS HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 08/13/2020
BLUE SPRING HEALTHCARE PARTNERS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 08/13/2020
FRIEDMAN, LEOPOLDIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 01/01/2026
GUTMAN, SAMUELIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 08/13/2020
WILDES, DONNAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/28/2025
AMILINENI, RAMIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/17/2025
COX, LEROYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/17/2025
KENNEY, DAWNIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 11/03/2020
MANZUR, KAMRANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 02/17/2025
ASTON HEALTHCARE LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

$13.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+7.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$2.3M
Related-party expense18% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 62%Medicare 14%Other / private 24%

This home reported $2.3M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% 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.

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
$9,201per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$326per 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 105514. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-08, 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