Bartram Crossing
6209 Brooks Bartram Drive, Jacksonville, FL 32258 · Non profit - Corporation · 100 certified beds · (904) 824-3326 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (28% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- CMS has flagged it for abuse
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Dec 2025
- inspectors cited 3 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
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 | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 4 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 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 fell from 5 to 2 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 | 9.9% | 8.7% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.8% | 5.5% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 1.4% | 0.3% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.8% | 0.7% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 4.1% | 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 | 0.8% | 2.5% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 6.5% | 9.5% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 19.4% | 14.4% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.1% | 99.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 10.6% | 4.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 18.5% | 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 table | 16.0% | 8.6% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.8% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.5% | 94.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 26.2% | 26.1% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 7.8% | 9.1% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.07 | 2.13 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.23 | 1.15 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
61.9% 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 1,312 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 40.0% 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 558 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 1.05 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 97% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 26% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 61.9%CMS range 59.5–64.5 | 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 | 11.7%CMS range 10.2–13.5 | 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 | 40.0% | 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 | 35.1% | 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 | 41.4% | 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 | 76.6% | 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 | 99.7% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.1% | 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 | 1.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 5.1%CMS range 3.7–6.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | better than U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.82 | 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
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 4.43 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.96 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.27 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 4.10 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.56 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.12 to 0.55 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 28% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
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.
13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · L2025-12-10 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespreadSet up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of the facility's policy titled QAPI (Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement) Plan, facility and resident records and staff interviews, the facility failed to have an effective QAPI process that utilized adverse incident data to identify root cause analyses (RCAs), develop effective performance improvement activities to prevent recurrence of an avoidable injury after one (Resident #2) of seven residents reviewed for falls fell in the presence of Certified Occupational Therapy Assistant (COTA) A while not wearing a physician's ordered leg brace during a therapy session. She suffered a nondisplaced fracture of the proximal tibia/fibula (upper end of the lower leg bones under the knee), a tear of the body and posterior horn of the medial meniscus (fibrocartilage band that spans the inner knee joint), hemarthrosis (bleeding into the joint cavity), substantial pain, fear of using the right leg. The QAPI committee was not involved in identifying a root cause of the incident or developing 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2025-12-10 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of facility and resident records, resident and staff interviews, and a review of facility policies titled Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation, Fall and Injury Reduction Best Practice Guidelines, and Bathroom Safety Best Practice, the facility failed to ensure sufficient safeguards and supervision to protect residents' right to be free from neglect by failing to ensure rehabilitation department staff were aware of, and implemented, care plan interventions to prevent two residents (Residents #2 and #1) from unavoidable falls with major injury, out of a total of seven residents reviewed for falls. On 11/10/25, the facility neglected to ensure that Resident #2 was wearing her physician-ordered hinged knee brace, locked in extension, while bearing weight on her right leg during a therapy session with Certified Occupational Therapy Assistant (COTA) A. The resident stepped back on her unsupported leg and fell, resulting in a nondisplaced fracture of the proximal tibia/fibula (upper end of the lower leg…
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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2025-12-10 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on a review of facility and resident records, resident and staff interviews, and a review of the facility policy titled Fall and Injury Reduction Best Practice Guidelines and the Bathroom Safety Best Practice guidelines, the facility failed to ensure residents received adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent unavoidable falls for two (Residents #2 and #1) of seven residents reviewed for falls.On 11/10/25 when Resident #2 was not wearing her physician-ordered hinged knee brace, she attended a therapy session with Certified Occupational Therapy Assistant (COTA) A. During the session she stepped back on her unsupported leg and fell, resulting in a nondisplaced fracture of the proximal tibia/fibula (upper end of the lower leg bones under the knee), a tear of the body and posterior horn of the medial meniscus (fibrocartilage band that spans the inner knee joint), hemarthrosis (bleeding into the joint cavity), substantial pain, fear of using the right leg, and a delayed discharge home. Ten days…
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 · Fcited before2026-03-26 · 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 observations, staff interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain sanitary conditions and proper food storage practices in the nourishment room on the 300 hallway, by failing to 1) Have a plate warming unit that was free of brown liquid residue, 2) Have a microwave free of food splatter, dried residue, and debris on the interior surfaces, including the top, sides, and base of the unit, and 3) Label and date bread stored in the cabinet above the microwave. These failures had the potential to negatively impact all residents who received food from the nourishment room. The findings include:On 3/25/2026 at 2:11 PM, an observation of the 300-hallway nourishment room revealed a cabinet containing a plate warming unit with visible accumulation of brown liquid residue, debris, and black particulate matter on the cabinet floor beneath the unit. The microwave was observed to have visible food splatter, dried residue, and debris on the interior surfaces, including the top, sides, and base of the unit. An opened loaf of bread was observed stored in the cabinet…
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 · D2026-03-26 · 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 review, the facility failed to provide resident dignity by leaving a urinary catheter collection bag uncovered for one (Resident #13) of five residents observed with urinary catheters, from a total sample of 42 residents.The findings included:On 03/23/2026 at 12:29 PM, Resident #13 was observed lying in bed, eyes closed, with lower extremity in orthopedic boot, elevated on pillow. Her urinary catheter collection bag was observed uncovered and hanging on the bed frame with clear yellow urine visible in the bag and tubing visible to anyone walking past her room. (Photographic evidence obtained)Record review for Resident #13 revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with an initial admission date on 07/22/2022. Her diagnoses included obstructive reflux uropathy, dysuria and peripheral vascular disease. A review of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) quarterly assessment, dated 01/08/2026, revealed the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS)…
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 · Fcited before2024-05-23 · 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 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 with the potential to affect all residents who consumed foods from the facility, by failing to 1) Date mark numerous open bundles of bread on the bread rack, 2) Clean grease buildup inside and around the door area of the convection oven, and 3) Clean food debris stuck on and around the safety guard of the mixer. Food handling and sanitation is important in health care settings serving nursing home residents. Unsafe food handling practices represent a potential source of pathogen exposure. The findings include: A tour of the kitchen was conducted on 05/22/2024 at 7:00 AM. During the tour, the bread rack adjacent to the juice machine was observed with four open bundles of bread with no date markings. The inside door area and oven floor of the convection oven next to the steamer was covered with food grime and grease build-up. The mixer…
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 · D2023-11-03 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record reviews, interviews, and facility policy and procedure review, the facility failed to notify the resident, the resident's representative, and the office of the Long-Term Care Ombudsman of the resident's transfer and the reasons for the transfer in writing for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for hospitalization. The findings include: A review of Resident #1's medical record found he was admitted from an acute care hospital to the facility on 9/16/23. He had diagnoses including, but not limited to, encounter for orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation, acquired absence of other right toes, Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), unspecified Atrial fibrillation, Peripheral Vascular Disease (PVD) and benign prostatic hyperplasia without lower urinary tract symptoms. Resident #1's medical record revealed that he had his wife designated as his primary emergency contact and responsible party. A review of the resident's nursing progress notes revealed that on 9/20/23 at 2:09 pm, Employee E, Registered Nurse (RN)/Unit Manager (UM) was summoned by the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-03 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record reviews, interviews, and facility policy and procedure review, the facility failed to provide written information prior to hospital transfer that notified the resident/resident representative of the facility's bed hold policy for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for hospital transfer. The findings include: A review of Resident #1's medical record found he was admitted from an acute care hospital to the facility on 9/16/23. He had diagnoses including, but not limited to, encounter for orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation, acquired absence of other right toes, Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), unspecified Atrial fibrillation, Peripheral Vascular Disease (PVD) and benign prostatic hyperplasia without lower urinary tract symptoms. Resident #1's medical record revealed that he had designated his wife as his primary emergency contact and responsible party. A discharge minimum data set (MDS) assessment with a reference date of 9/20/23, indicated unplanned discharge, return anticipated. Cognitive skills for decision making: moderately impaired.…
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 · D2023-11-03 · tag F0626 — isolatedPermit a resident to return to the nursing home after hospitalization or therapeutic leave that exceeds bed-hold policy.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to permit a resident to return after a transfer to the hospital for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for transfer/discharge. The findings include: A review of Resident #1's medical record found he was admitted from an acute care hospital to the facility on 9/16/23. He had diagnoses including, but not limited to, encounter for orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation, acquired absence of other right toes, Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), unspecified Atrial fibrillation, Peripheral Vascular Disease (PVD) and benign prostatic hyperplasia without lower urinary tract symptoms. A telephone interview was conducted with the hospital discharge planner on 10/12/23 at 10:26 am regarding Resident #1. She stated the resident was previously sent to the hospital on 9/18/23 and returned to the facility the same day. Resident #1 returned to the hospital emergency department on 9/20/23 at approximately 3:30 pm for observation. The 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.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2022-06-23 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure proper sanitation and food storage practices were adhered to in order to prevent the outbreak of foodborne illnesses. The findings include: During a tour of the kitchen on 6/21/22 at 10:52 AM with Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) E, he stated he had been employed at the facility for approximately one year. At this time, he identified Food Service Utility Worker F as the primary dishwasher. He stated he completed weekly kitchen audits and all outdated and damaged food should be discarded. An observation of one of the kitchen freezers revealed an open pack of ground turkey labeled use by 6/15/2022. When asked about this, the CDM acknowledged it was out of date and stated, It's not on the menu. There was also an unopened package of veggie burgers labeled use by 6/18/2022. The CDM stated the burgers weren't open and were there just in case a vegetarian was admitted into the facility. As the tour of the kitchen continued, a box labeled red potatoes was observed sitting on a shelf in the kitchen. Upon…
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 · D2022-06-23 · 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 ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice and the comprehensive person-centered care plan, by failing to ensure that two (Residents #23 and #73) of 25 sampled residents received care as ordered by the physician. Resident #73 had orders for follow up with oncology due to a history of breast cancer, and Resident #23 had orders for laboratory diagnostic tests. These orders were not carried out. The findings include: 1. On 06/21/22 at 3:41 PM, Resident #23 stated she did not always get her prescribed cream. Staff told her they didn't have it on hand and would use her personal Vaseline ointment instead. A review of Resident #23's clinical record revealed she was admitted on [DATE] with a re-entry on 7/20/19. Her diagnoses included inclusion body myositis, contracture of muscle unspecified upper arm, paranoid schizophrenia, and inclusive body mastitis. A review of the active physician's orders…
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 · D2022-06-23 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 review gradual dose reduction recommendations for one (Resident #73) of five residents selected for psychotropic drug review from a total sample of 25 residents. The findings include: A review of Resident #73's clinical record revealed an admission on [DATE] with a re-entry on 2/27/16. Diagnoses included hemiparesis following unspecified cerebrovascular disease affecting unspecified cite, anxiety disorder, and major depressive disorder. A review of the June 2022 Physician's Order Sheets revealed active physician's orders for the following: Lexapro 20 milligrams (mg) every day (QD) for depression, Eliquis 2.5 mg every 12 hours for Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT - blood clot), megace 400 mg one time a day for poor appetite, Dextromethorphan-quinidine 20-10 mg every 12 hours for pseudobablor affect PBA (sudden episodes of uncontrollable and inappropriate laughing or crying), and buspirone 15 mg BID (twice daily) for anxiety. A review of the active care plan…
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 · D2022-06-23 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, and resident and facility record reviews, the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records for one (Resident #74) of two residents reviewed for non-pressure skin conditions, from a total of 25 residents in the sample. The findings include: An observation was conducted of Resident #74 on 06/21/22 at 1:29 PM. Multiple bruises were present on both forearms, and he had a dime-sized skin tear on the right forearm above his wrist. When he was asked what happened, Resident #74 replied he did not know; perhaps it was from his hospital bracelet. Observation confirmed a plastic snap-on medical identification bracelet secured loosely around his right wrist. On 06/22/22 at 11:07 AM, Resident #74 was observed in an activity on the 300 hall. The skin tear to his right forearm was visible and open to the air. The identification bracelet was still on the same wrist. Resident #74 reported the nurses were applying a salve to the area, and he would ask them to place the next bracelet on his left arm. 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.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BROOKS SKILLED NURSING, INC. | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 06/01/2010 |
| GENESIS HEALTH INC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 04/28/1982 |
| BAER, DOUGLAS | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 06/01/2010 |
| MANN, ERIC | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| DERIENZO, VICTOR | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| TABOR, JAMES | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 02/28/2022 |
| ALLEN, JENNIFER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 02/10/2025 |
| LEI, MARC | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
| XIE, CHONGLUN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2020 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 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.
This home reported $2.8M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 12% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in FL
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 105645. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-26, 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.