Life Care Center Of Hilliard
3756 W Third St, Hilliard, FL 32046 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 120 certified beds · (904) 845-3988 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- 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)
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- about 21% 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 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 held steady at 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 6.9% | 8.7% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.2% | 5.5% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 0.7% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.3% | 4.6% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 7.7% | 2.5% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 4.7% | 9.5% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 16.5% | 14.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 99.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.2% | 4.5% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 6.5% | 10.5% | 21.2% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 8.8% | 8.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.6% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.3% | 94.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 27.4% | 26.1% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 12.9% | 9.1% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.32 | 2.13 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.12 | 1.15 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ 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.
58.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 163 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 83.7% 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 49 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 47% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 58.2%CMS range 51.3–64.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.7%CMS range 8.3–14.7 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 83.7% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 77.5% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 87.8% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 99.1% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 98.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.7% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 3.5% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.9%CMS range 3.5–10.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.88 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 108.6 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 11 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 3.83 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.67 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.22 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 3.36 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.02 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.81 to 0.33 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 55% 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
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
12 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · F2026-04-23 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 food service observations, staff interviews, and a review of the facility's policies and procedures, the facility failed to follow proper sanitation and food handling practices to prevent the outbreak of foodborne illness, by failing to ensure food items were properly labeled and dated in the main kitchen. This deficient practice prevents staff from determining the appropriate use by date and increases the risk of pathogen exposure to all residents who consume foods from the facility's kitchen.The findings include:On 04/20/2026 at 10:33 AM, an observation of the dry storage room revealed one opened box of cabbage, one opened box of zucchini, one opened box of potatoes, one opened box of sweet potatoes, one opened box of bananas, one open crate of onions, and one opened bag of pasta with no label or date. Observations of the reach-in freezer in the cook area revealed one opened bag of French fries, one opened bag of cauliflower, and one opened bag of biscuits with no labels or dates. (photographic evidence obtained)On 04/22/2026 at 11:19 AM, another observation of the dry…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-04-23 · tag F0628 — patternProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
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, record reviews, interviews, and a review of the facility's policies and procedures, the facility failed to provide transfer/discharge notification to the Long-Term Care (LTC) Ombudsman's office for seven (Residents #129, #127, #48, #8, #91, #98 and #135) of 21 residents reviewed for transfer/discharge. Appropriate notification to the LTC Ombudsman's office provides added protection to residents from being inappropriately transferred or discharged . It provides residents with access to an advocate who can inform them of their options and rights, and it ensures that the LTC Ombudsman's office is aware of facility practices and activities related to transfers and discharges. The findings include:1.A review of Resident #129's medical record revealed an admission date of 02/26/2026 with diagnoses including fracture of the superior rim of the right pubis, subsequent encounter for fracture healing.A review of the resident's active care plans revealed a focus area indicating a short stay with a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-04-23 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, record reviews, interviews and a review of facility policies and procedures, the facility failed to ensure that residents who needed respiratory care, were provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, by failing to ensure that oxygen was administered at the ordered flow rate for four (Residents #95, #115, #119 and #6) of 10 residents reviewed for oxygen therapy. The findings include: 1.On 04/20/2026 at 1:10 PM, an observation of Resident #95's oxygen concentrator revealed an oxygen flow rate of 3 liters per minute (LPM). (photographic evidence obtained) On 04/22/2026 at 10:09 AM, another observation was made of Resident #95 in her wheelchair receiving oxygen from a portable oxygen tank at a flow rate of 3 LPM. (photographic evidence obtained) A review of Resident #95's medical record revealed an admission date of 03/29/2026 with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and shortness of breath (SOB). A review of the resident's Comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment revealed a Brief Interview for Mental…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-23 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure 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, interviews, record review ,and a review of the facility's policies and procedures, the facility failed to ensure that its medication error rate was not 5% or greater. There were 26 opportunities for error with two errors identified, resulting in an error rate of 7% and involving two (Residents #6 and #99) of five residents observed during medication administration.The findings include:On 04/21/2026 at 11:13 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) A was observed preparing medications for Resident #6. She administered Refresh Tears Ophthalmic Solution, 1 drop in each eye. She was asked to compare the current physician's order with the dose she had just administered. She confirmed the current order was for Refresh Tears Ophthalmic Solution, instill 2 drops in each eye.On 04/22/2026 at 10:13 AM, Registered Nurse (RN) F was observed preparing medications for Resident #99. She prepared Sertraline Hydrochloride (HCL)100 milligram (mg), 1 tablet. She was asked to compare the dose she prepared with the current physician's order. She confirmed that the order was written for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-13 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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 a record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate allegations of abuse for two (Residents #1 and #5) of three residents reviewed for abuse, from a total sample of 5 residents. The findings include: 1. A record review for Resident #1 found she was admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included fracture of the upper end of the left humerus (the long bone between the shoulder and elbow). A review of Resident #1's Discharge Return Anticipated minimum data set (MDS) assessment with a reference date 12/24/24 noted Resident #1 had OK memory and was independent with daily decision making. She required substantial to maximum assistance with toileting and partial to moderate assistance to move from sitting to standing and transfers. On 1/13/25 at 2:00 pm, an interview was conducted with Resident #1. She explained she had fallen and broke her humerus in two places which resulted in a loss of dignity with her decline in activities of daily…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-11 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a sanitary and orderly interior, by failing to maintain the shower rooms on the 100, 200 and 600 hallways in an orderly and sanitary manner. The findings include: On 07/11/24, during a tour of the facility with the facility's Housekeeping and Laundry Director from 1:18 PM through 2:00 PM, the facility's shower rooms were observed. In the shower room on the 600-hallway, numerous used razors, deodorant sticks/canisters, and hairbrushes were present throughout the shower room, all of which were unlabeled. (Photographic evidence obtained) In the shower room on the 200-hallway, two shower basins were observed, in which were unlabeled, used bath products including used razors, a shower puff, deodorant sticks/canisters and hairbrushes. (Photographic evidence obtained) In the shower room on the 100-hallway, numerous used razors and deodorant sticks/canisters were observed, all of which were unlabeled. There was also a pile of soiled laundry and two bags of linens located on the floor near the toilet. (Photographic evidence…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-07-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe and sanitary environment, and to help prevent the transmission of communicable diseases and infections, by failing to ensure proper infection control practices during insulin administration, resident dining, gloving, and linen handling. This impacted two (Residents #54 and #4) of 44 residents in the total survey sample, as well as numerous residents in the dining room on 7/10/24 during the breakfast meal, and potentially more receiving assistance with meals and other care from Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) Y and C. The findings include: 1. On 7/11/24 at 11:26 AM, an observation was made of Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) J administering Novolog Insulin (a medication used to control elevated blood sugars) to Resident #54. LPN J did not clean the hub of the Novolog Flex Pen with alcohol prior to inserting the needle. On 7/11/24 at 11:30 AM, an interview was conducted…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-11 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain residents' dignity while dining related to staff standing while assisting with meals and tablemates not being served trays together for six (Residents #106, #4, #8, #75, #21, and #6) of eight residents reviewed for dignity, from a total of 44 residents in the survey sample. The findings include: 1. On 7/8/24 at 5:33 PM, Resident #106 was observed being assisted with his dinner tray by Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) G, who was observed standing while assisting the resident with his meal. Resident #106 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a medical history significant for paraplegia, right hand contracture, and macular degeneration. A review of Resident #106's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 5/24/24, revealed he had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) Score of 12 out of 15 possible points, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. He was also documented as requiring set up assistance for his…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-08-15 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record reviews and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving neglect were reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation was made. The facility failed to provide assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) for more than 8 hours for one (Resident #6) of three residents whose grievances were reviewed, from a total sample of eight residents. The findings include: A review of the facility's grievance log revealed a grievance dated 6/13/23 from Resident #5. Resident complained that her sister who was also her roommate (Resident #6) had not been checked and changed for over 8 hours from 6:30 am - 3:30 pm. On 6/14/23, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) was assigned to investigate the concern. The investigation findings read, verified certified nursing Assistant (CNA) for that resident. The action taken included education for CNAs to check and change resident's every two hours. The grievance indicated that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-15 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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 interviews, record reviews and policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations of neglect were thoroughly investigated. The facility failed to investigate staff failure to provide assistance with activities of daily living (ADL) for more than 8 hours for one (Resident #6) of three residents whose grievances were reviewed, from a resident sample of eight. The findings include: A review of the facility's grievance log revealed a grievance dated 6/13/23 from Resident #5. Resident complained that her sister who was also her roommate (Resident #6) had not been checked and changed for over 8 hours from 6:30 am - 3:30 pm. On 6/14/23, the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) was assigned to investigate the concern. The investigation findings read, verified certified nursing Assistant (CNA) for that resident. The action taken included education for CNAs to check and change resident's every two hours. The grievance indicated that education was provided. (Photographic copy…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-07-28 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's choices for one (Resident #2) of 29 residents sampled, by failing to apply physician-ordered topical medication. The findings include: On 7/26/22 at 11:00 AM, an attempt was made to interview Resident #2. When asked if she had any concerns, she nodded yes. She had communication difficulty and was difficult to understand. She touched her knees, then said her daughter's name. When asked if her daughter should be contacted, she nodded yes. In a telephone interview on 7/26/22 at 2:41 PM, Resident #2's daughter stated she visited her mother regularly and attended her care plan meeting. She stated her only concern was that her mother's speech had gotten worse and she thought her mother had had mini strokes. She stated she had requested that her mother be evaluated by the speech therapist but she had not heard…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-07-28 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that residents requiring respiratory care, received such care, consistent with professional standards of practice and the comprehensive care plan for three (Residents #53, #87 and #58) of five residents reviewed for oxygen use, from a total of 29 residents in the sample. The findings include: 1. Observations of Resident #53 were made on the following dates and times: On 7/26/22 at 3:05 PM, her oxygen concentrator flow rate was set at 4 LPM. (Photographic evidence obtained) The resident was asked if she knew what the flow rate should be, and she stated it should be set at 3 LPM. On 7/27/22 at 4:12 PM, the resident's oxygen concentrator flow rate was set at 4 LPM. (Photographic evidence obtained) On 7/28/22 at 11:04 AM, the resident's oxygen concentrator flow rate was set at 4 LPM. (Photographic evidence obtained) An interview was conducted with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) A on 7/28/22 at 11:15 AM. She stated if a resident 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.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA — 194 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 3.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 4 of 5 | 3.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
The other 193 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.4★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 193; 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 / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| PRESTON, FORREST | Individual | INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/24/2015 |
| ANDERSON, PAMELA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 10/10/2022 |
| CONNORS, TYLER | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/03/2025 |
| PRESTON, AARON | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/03/2005 |
| CROSS, CINDY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/24/2017 |
| HENRY, TERRY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/24/2017 |
| THURMOND, JOAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/24/2017 |
| LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 08/24/2015 |
| FLETCHER, TODD | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 05/01/2021 |
| LAY, LISA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 04/24/2017 |
| PRESTON, AUBREY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 11/27/2024 |
| SHARPE, MICHAEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/03/2025 |
| SWANKER, RICHARD | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/01/2022 |
| ZIEGLER, JAMES | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 08/24/2015 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 22 rows in the source record cover these 14 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.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 74% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $2.5M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 21% 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
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
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Florida Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 105756. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-23, 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.