Charming Lakes Rehab
2020 W Lake Parker Dr, Lakeland, FL 33805 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 120 certified beds · (863) 682-7580 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0567)
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (34) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $77,880 in federal fines (most recent 2025-08-07)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (60%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 24% 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 | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 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 — 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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 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 1 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 | 5.6% | 8.7% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.1% | 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 | 5.3% | 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 | 2.9% | 2.5% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 6.7% | 9.5% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 16.6% | 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 | 9.4% | 4.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 3.8% | 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 | 5.4% | 8.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.6% | 1.5% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.2% | 94.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 35.3% | 26.1% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 4.4% | 9.1% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.91 | 2.13 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.03 | 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.
40.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 25 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 49.5% 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 107 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 0.48 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 79% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 23% 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 | 40.4%CMS range 25.3–55.0 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.3%CMS range 6.5–14.4 | 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 | 49.5% | 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 | 45.8% | 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 | 43.9% | 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 | 15.8% | 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 | 99.1% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.0% | 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 | 4.4% | 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 | 7.0%CMS range 3.8–12.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.91 | 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 114.0 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 3.44 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.47 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.12 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 3.30 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.50 on weekdays — 6% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.47 to 0.45 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 60% is well above 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.
34 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 23 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-08-21 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to provide ADL care for fingernails for 3 residents, (Resident #68, Resident #6, and Resident #1), who were sampled for ADLs. The failure to provide ADL care caused harm to 1 Resident, (Resident #68). The findings included: A review of the facility’s policy for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) effective 04/01/2022, revealed the purpose was to ensure all residents’ needs were met in a manner that promoted their quality of life and preferences. The procedure section included that the facility would provide residents with the appropriate treatment and services to maintain hygiene. This included bathing, dressing, grooming, and oral care. 1.A record review revealed that Resident #68 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included Cerebral Infarction, Dementia, and Spastic Hemiplegia unspecified side The minimum data set (MDS) quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed he had severe cognitive impairment, and he was dependent on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-21 · 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 provide dining in a manner to preserve the dignity for 3 of 33 residents in the final sample, Residents #11, 14 and 9. The findings included:The facility’s policy, “Resident Rights – Right to Respect, Dignity and to have Personal Property” with a reference date of 04/01/22, did not address dignity during dining. 1. Resident #11 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. According to the resident’s most recent complete assessment, a Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS), with a reference date of 05/21/25, Resident #14 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 12, indicating that Resident #14 was moderately cognitively impaired. The assessment documented that the resident required partial/moderate assistance for eating. Resident #14’s diagnoses at the time of the assessment included: Arthritis, Parkinson’s disease, Seizure disorder, muscle weakness, Dysphagia. Resident #14’s care plan for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs)…
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 before2025-08-21 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
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 follow orders for fluid restrictions for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for Dialysis, Resident #3. The findings included:The facility's policy, 'Fluid Restrictions' with a reference date of 05/2014 and a revision date of 09/2017, documented: A fluid restriction will be implemented only as part of a therapeutic diet prescription. The policy did not address fluids provided by staff for hydration. Resident #3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. According to the resident's most recent complete assessment, a Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), Resident #3 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating the resident was cognitively intact. The assessment documented that Resident #15 required supervision or touching assistance for eating. Resident #3's diagnoses at the time of the assessment included: Hypertension, Peripheral Vascular disease (PVD), Diabetes Melitus, Psychotic disorder, Cerebral infarction, Muscle weakness,…
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 · D2025-08-21 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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 provide nutrition via enteral feedings per physician orders for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #68), reviewed for enteral feeding. This had the potential to affect 3 residents who were dependent on enteral feeding for nutrition. The findings included:The facility's policy on Enteral Feeding and Nutrition, effective 04/01/22, was to ensure adequate parameters of nutrition and hydration status through the provision of physician ordered enteral feedings. It specified that the physician orders for enteral nutrition were based on recommendations of the Registered Dietitian. A record review revealed that Resident #68 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included Cerebral Infarction, Dementia, Dysphagia following Cerebral Infarction, and Gastrostomy Status. The minimum data set (MDS) quarterly assessment dated [DATE] revealed he had severe cognitive impairment, and he received enteral feeding exclusively, also known as tube…
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 before2025-08-21 · 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 review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning, is provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 1 sampled resident for respiratory care (Resident #24). The findings included:Review of the facility's policy titled, Tracheostomy Care with an effective date of 04/01/22 included in part the following: General Guidelines -Aseptic technique must be used: During cleaning and sterilization of reusable tracheostomy tubes. A mask and eyewear must be worn if splashes, spraying of blood or body fluids is likely to occur when performing this procedure. Clean the Removable Inner Cannula- Maintaining sterile field, pour equal parts hydrogen peroxide and normal Saline in one compartment of opened kit. Pour normal saline in another compartment. Put on sterile gloves. Secure the outer neck plate with non-dominate hand. Remove and discard gloves into appropriate…
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 · D2025-08-21 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
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 pharmaceutical services, including procedures that assure the accurate dispensing, and administering of all drugs for, 7 of 9 residents reviewed for controlled substances (Residents #7, #104, #32, #14, #48, #69, and #85) and failed to establish a system of records of all controlled drugs to ensure discontinued controlled medications are removed from the medication carts for 2 of 9 residents reviewed for controlled medications (Residents #104 and #14). The findings included: 1. During an interview conducted on 08/19/25 at 9:51 AM with the Director of Nursing (DON) who was asked about medications, the DON stated all meds are secured at all times. When asked about what happens to controlled medications for residents who discharged or sent to the hospital, the DON stated the nurse on the med cart will remove the medication and give it to her. The DON said she is always on the floor daily and always asks nurses if they have any…
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 before2025-08-21 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
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 review the facility failed to ensure adequate monitoring of behaviors and side effects for residents on psychotropic medications for 3 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications (Residents #24, #2, #3). The findings included:Review of the facility’s policy titled, “Antipsychotic Medication Use” with an effective date of 04/02/22 included in part the following: Nursing staff shall monitor for and report any of the following side effects and adverse consequences of antipsychotic medications to the Attending Physician. 1. Record review for Resident #2 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included in part the following: Urinary Tract Infection, Dementia, and Psychotic Disorder with Hallucinations Due to Known Physiological Condition. The Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE] documented in Section C a Brief Interview of Mental Status score of 3 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Review of the Physician’s Orders for Resident #2 revealed…
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 before2025-08-21 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
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 secure medications at all times during 2 of 4 medication pass observations (Residents #73 and #45), failed to secure medications at all times for over the counter medications in 1 of 2 unit manager's offices (unit manager for south), and failed to store medications according to facility policy for 1 of 3 medication carts reviewed for medication storage (Med Cart 500 Hall). The findings included:Review of the facility's policy titled, Medication Storage with no date included in part the following: Medications will be stored in a manner that maintains the integrity of the product and ensures the safety of the residents and is in accordance with the Florida Department of Health guidelines. With the exception of Emergency Drug Kits, all medications will be stored in a locked cabinet, cart or room that is accessible only to authorized personnel. Expired, discontinued and/or contaminated medications will be removed from the medication storage…
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 · D2025-08-21 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolatedEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, policy review, and record review, the facility failed to provide pureed foods in appropriate consistency for 3 residents (Resident #30, Resident #78, Resident #76) on Dysphagia Puree texture diets and for one resident (Resident #108) who was on a diet with an order for nectar thickened fluids. This had the potential to affect 27 residents who were on mechanically altered diets. The findings included:A review of the policy on the Levels of the National Dysphagia Diet from the Nutrition Care Manual dated 2019 described the pureed diet as a homogenous, pudding-like consistency without particles, The General Guidelines for Thickened Liquids stated that all liquids should be thickened to the proper consistency, including soups, water, oral supplements, and all other beverages. 1.A record review revealed that Resident #30 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), Dementia, Muscle Weakness, and Lack of Coordination. 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 · D2025-08-21 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that potentially hazardous foods were held and reheated in a manner to prevent the growth of pathogens that cause foodborne illness and in a manner consistent with professional standards for food safety for 1 of 33 residents in the final sample, Resident #3. The findings included: The facility's policy, 'Food: Preparation', with a reference date of 05/2014 and a revision date of 09/2027, did not address reheating potentially hazardous foods (PHF) from a resident's meal. Resident #3 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. According to the resident's most recent complete assessment, a Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), Resident #3 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, indicating the resident was cognitively intact. The assessment documented that Resident #15 required supervision or touching assistance for eating. Resident #3's diagnoses at the time of the assessment included: Diabetes Melitus, Seizure disorder,…
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 before2025-08-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide 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 record reviews, observations, and interviews, the facility failed to implement an effective infection control program related to 1. Not following local public health recommendations during an investigation of a possible Legionella outbreak. 2. Failed to ensure respiratory equipment was stored in a clean and sanitary manner for two of two observations. 3. Failed to ensure staff, including providers, used appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) to prevent the transmission of an infectious pathogen for one resident (#5) of two residents sampled for transmission-based precautions. 4. Failed to display signage identifying the type of precautions that should be used for one resident (#3) of two sampled residents.Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #1’s clinical record showed the resident was admitted on [DATE] from an acute care facility. The record revealed the resident was admitted with diagnoses including but not limited to unspecified organism sepsis, acute and chronic respiratory failure…
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.
Show the remaining 23 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-05-25 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and policy review, the facility did not ensure a safe, clean, and homelike environment related to proper cleaning and maintenance in nine resident bathrooms (400, 401, 402, 403, 404, 405, 406, 407, and 409) out of ten bathrooms reviewed, two resident room baseboards (402 and 407) out of ten resident rooms observed, and one resident room wall (407) out of ten resident rooms observed. Findings included: An observation was made on 5/22/23 at 9:30 a.m. in the bathroom of resident room [ROOM NUMBER]. The bathroom toilet had a black and brown substance at the base of the toilet, a space between the base of the toilet and the floor was visible. The screws for the bowl base were rusted and dusty. (Photographic Evidence Obtained.) An observation was made on 5/22/23 at 9:40 a.m. in the bathroom of resident room [ROOM NUMBER]. The bathroom toilet had a brown substance at the base of the toilet. On the window wall beneath the air conditioner the baseboard was not sticking to the wall. 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 · E2023-05-25 · tag F0644 — patternCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 record review, staff interviews, and review of the facility's policy, the facility failed to ensure the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR's) were completed accurately for 5 of 6 residents reviewed, (#60, #18, #68, #16 and #1). Findings included: A review of Resident #60's admission record showed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses to include major depressive disorder. A review of current physician orders for Resident #60 dated 05/05/23 showed the resident was receiving Mirtazapine 7.5 MG (Milligrams) by mouth daily for depression. A minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE], section I, showed the resident had a diagnosis of depression. A review of a level I PASARR for Resident #60 dated 12/20/22 revealed no diagnosis were checked. A review of Resident #18's admission record dated 05/23/23revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include Major depressive disorder, Vascular Dementia with behavioral…
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 · D2023-05-25 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
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 review and review of facility policy, the facility did not ensure one resident (#60) of one reviewed had access to his personal funds. Findings included: On 05/22/23 at 10:17 a.m., an interview was conducted with Resident #60. He stated he had been asking how much money was in his account and no one could give him that information. He stated he had requested a statement without success. Resident #60 stated he did not know what happened to his money upon admission. A review of Resident #60's admission record showed the resident was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. A review of a document for Resident #60, titled, Resident Fund Management Service, dated 02/06/23, showed an incomplete form that did not show accountability of the resident's funds. On 05/23/23 at 12:18 p.m., an interview was conducted with Staff I, the Human Resource Director, and Resident Accounts Manager. Staff I stated this resident did not have any funds that she knew of. Staff I…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-25 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure proper treatment of newly identified skin impairments and failed to ensure proper treatment of existing skin conditions were implemented for one (Resident #12) of three residents sampled for skin conditions. Findings included: A review of Resident #12's medical record revealed Resident #12 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Alzheimer's Disease, hypertension, and muscle weakness. A review of Resident #12's physician's orders revealed a wound care order dated 5/22/2023 to cleanse wound to right shin with normal saline, pat dry, apply xeroform gauze layers, and cover with abdominal pad twice weekly on Monday and Thursday on the 7 AM to 3 PM (Day) shift and as needed. A review of Resident #12's care plan revealed a Focus, reviewed on 5/2/2023, Resident #12 has skin breakdown of a skin tear to the right shin. Interventions included to administer treatments as ordered and monitor for effectiveness and follow…
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 before2023-05-25 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
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 provide adequate nutrition to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status for one (Resident #32) of two residents sampled for nutritional requirements. Findings included: A review of Resident #32's medical record revealed Resident #32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of pneumonia, muscular dystrophy, quadriplegia, and gastrostomy status. A review of Resident #32's physician's orders revealed an enteral feed order dated 2/28/2023 for Glucerna 1.2 Cal administered at 70 milliliters (ml) per hour over 20 hours, off at 10 AM and on at 2 PM. Resident #32's physician's orders also revealed an order dated 2/28/2023 for Nothing by Mouth (NPO). A review of Resident #32's care plan revealed a Focus, initiated on 2/28/2023, Resident #32 has impaired swallowing related to muscular dystrophy and was NPO. Interventions included follow diet as prescribed and enteral feedings as ordered. A review of Resident #32's weight…
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 · D2023-05-25 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate pain management for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to provide pain medication to one (#40) of two residents surveyed for pain management. Findings include: An interview was conducted with Resident #40 on 05/24/23 at 03:36 PM. Resident #40 is a [AGE] year old male admitted to this facility on 5/3/23 for rehabilitation and reconditioning after lengthy illness following complications from cardiac surgery. During the interview Resident #40 said he returned just from the hospital, because the facility did not have his pain medication. Resident #40 said on Monday (5/22/23) night he requested pain medication but the facility did not have it because they ran out and it was not reordered in time (Oxycodone 7.5 mg tablet by mouth every 6 hours as needed for pain). Resident #40 said that when he is in pain his breathing gets faster which leads to increased pain and starts a cycle that is hard to get under control. He said he was told the facility was unable to provide him with the medication and would not be…
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 before2023-05-25 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
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 monitor behaviors and side effects of psychotropic medications for two (Resident #23 and 68) of the sampled five residents. Findings included: 1. A review of the admission Record for Resident #23 showed she was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Alzheimer's Disease, persistent mood disorder, depression, schizophreniform disorder, mood disorder, and anxiety disorder. Section N Medications of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] showed Resident #23 took antipsychotic medications for seven days and antidepressants for seven days. A review of the Active Orders as of 05/25/23 revealed the following: -Olanzapine Tablet 5 MG (milligrams) - Give 1 tablet po (by mouth) daily related to Schizophreniform Disorder -Trazodone HCL Tablet 150 MG- Give 1 tablet po at bedtime for depression monitor for s/s (signs/symptoms) of depression There was no order in place for behavior and side effect monitoring. A review of the Medication…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-25 · 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, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5%. A total of thirty medication opportunities were observed with three errors for two (Resident #56 and Resident #70) of five residents observed for medication administration, resulting in a medication error rate of 10%. Findings included: A review of Resident #56's physician's orders revealed the following orders: - An order dated 5/4/2023 for Acetaminophen 325 milligrams (mg), 2 tablets = 650 mg, by mouth two times a day. - An order dated 3/20/2023 for Calcium-Carb (Carbonate) 600 mg by mouth three times a day. - An order dated 3/17/2023 for Cholecalciferol (Vitamin D3) 1,000 units by mouth one time daily. - An order dated 3/17/2023 for Divalproex Sodium 125 mg by mouth two times a day. - An order dated 3/17/2023 for Fish Oil capsule 1,000 mg give 2 capsules = 2,000 mg by mouth one time a day. - An order dated 3/17/2023 for Lisinopril 2.5 mg by mouth one time a day. - An order dated 3/18/2023 for Memantine Hydrochloride (HCl) 10 mg by mouth two times a day. An…
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 · D2023-05-25 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to document complete and accurate medical records for one (Resident #32) of forty-two sampled residents. Findings included: A review of Resident #32's medical record revealed Resident #32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of pneumonia, muscular dystrophy, quadriplegia, and sepsis. A review of Resident #32's physician's order revealed an order dated 3/10/2023 for oxygen saturation monitoring every shift. A review of Resident #32's Medication Administration Record (MAR) from 5/1/2023 on the 7 AM to 3 PM shift (Day) shift to 5/24/2023 on the Day shift revealed the task for oxygen saturation every shift was being documented as completed but no oxygen saturation readings were documented on the MAR. A review of Resident #32's oxygen saturation readings from 5/1/2023 on the Day shift to 5/24/2023 on the Day shift revealed Resident #32's oxygen saturation levels were not documented every shift as ordered. A total of fourteen oxygen…
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 · D2023-05-25 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — isolatedSet 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 observation, record review, interviews and the facility policy review, and the Plan of Correction review, the facility failed to ensure that it had a functioning Quality Assurance Committee. The facility was actively involved in the effective creation, implementation and monitoring of the plan of correction for deficient practice during a recertification survey that was conducted on 5/22/23 through 5/25/23 and was cited F692. On 7/27/23 the facility was recited for F692. The facility had developed a Plan of Correction with a completion date 6/24/23. Findings included: Ongoing non-compliance was identified at the revisit related to the administration of nutritional supplement as ordered by the physician to ensure the resident received an adequate amount of nutritional supplement through his gastrostomy tube. The facility developed a plan of correction that included: Licensed nurses were re-educated by the Director of Nursing (DON)/designee on 6/5/23, the components of this regulation with emphasis on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2021-08-13 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
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 review of facility policy and procedures, the facility failed to ensure medications and biologicals were stored, secured, and disposed of in accordance with professional standards related to 1.) not ensuring 1 of 2 treatment carts in the facility remained secured and locked, 2.) not ensuring that 1 of 5 medication carts in the facility remained secured and locked, 3.) not ensuring medications had proper labeling in 1 of 3 medication carts observed, 4.) not ensuring that medications were disposed of and stored properly during observation of medication administration for 1 (Resident #503) of 7 residents observed during medication administration and 5.) not ensuring medications were properly secured during a tour of the facility on 1 of 4 days. Findings included: An observation was made on [DATE] at 08:27 AM of a treatment cart on the 600 unit of the facility. The treatment cart was observed to be unlocked in the unit hallway with no staff members observed in the immediate…
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 before2021-08-13 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility did not ensure resident and non-resident areas were maintained in a safe and sanitary manner at the North EXIT door area in Hallway 200, and in six out of ten resident rooms in hallway 200 for three of four days of the survey (08/10/21, 08/11/21 and 08/12/21). Findings included: During the initial facility tour on 08/10/21 at 06:26 a.m., an observation of the North EXIT door area revealed debris on the floor. The metal threshold was covered with bio growth and built up debris. The area was also observed with dead insects, estimated count of 60 insects. Photographic evidence was obtained. On 08/10/21 and 08/11/21, during multiple facility tours of hallway 200, observations revealed resident rooms 211, 213, 208, and 205 with dust, debris, food crumbs, and dead insects on the floor. On 08/10/21 06:32 a.m., an interview was conducted with Staff B, Unit Manager who made the observations. Staff B said, The gnats were reported yesterday, I also reported…
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 · D2021-08-13 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility did not ensure that two residents (Resident #94 and Resident #97) out of 3 residents sampled for pre-admission screening had a correctly completed Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR). Findings included: 1. A review of Resident #97's Medical Record revealed that Resident #97 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Trisomy 21 (a form of Down Syndrome). A review of Resident #97's Care Plan revealed a problem, last revised on 06/16/2021, that Resident #97 had impaired cognitive function and/or impaired thought process related to Trisomy 21. Interventions included to keep the resident's routine consistent and try to provide consistent care givers as much as possible in order to decrease confusion. A review of Resident #97's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment revealed, under Section C - Cognitive Patterns, a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3, which indicated severe cognitive impact.…
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 · D2021-08-13 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to implement care plan interventions related to oxygen use, and proper oxygen flow rate for one (Resident #38) of thirty-one sampled residents, during two of four days observed (8/10/2021, and 8/11/2021). Findings included: Review of Resident #38's current care plans with next review date 9/13/2021 revealed the following areas: - Resident #38 has Hypertension, Shortness of Breath with interventions in place - Resident #38 has oxygen therapy as needed for shortness of breath with interventions in place to include but not limited to: Given medications as ordered by the Physician, Monitor for signs and symptoms of respiratory distress and report to the Physician as need On 8/10/2021 at 6:50 a.m. and 10:30 a.m., Resident #38 was observed in her room and lying in bed. The call light was placed within her reach. Resident #38 was observed with oxygen tubing leading from the oxygen concentrator to her nasal cannula. An interview with the resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-08-13 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADL)s was provided for one (Resident # 54) of three residents sampled. Findings included: Resident #54 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses of unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance, generalized anxiety disorder, difficulty walking, and mood disorder. Review of the MDS (minimum data set) dated 06/25/21 revealed a BIMS (brief interview for mental status) of 13. Section G, Functional status, under dressing revealed that Resident #54 required extensive assistance for dressing - how resident put on, fastened and took off all items of clothing, including putting on and changing clothing. Under Toilet use, how the resident used the toilet room, commode, bed pan or urinal, cleaned self after elimination, changed and adjusted clothes. Resident #54 required one-person physical assist. Care plan with a last review date 07/05/21 revealed that Resident #54 had an…
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 before2021-08-13 · 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 record review, interviews, observation, and policy review the facility did not ensure a hospice care plan and/or assessment and appropriate communication related to hospice services including updates for a change of condition were in the medical record for one resident (#64) of nine residents receiving hospice care at the facility. Also based on interview and policy review the facility did not ensure there was a contract with the hospice provider for one resident (#64) of nine residents receiving hospice care. Findings included: Resident #64 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to, heart failure, type II diabetes mellitus, and Afib (atrial fibrillation), according to the face sheet in the admission record. A review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], reflected a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, indicating Resident #64 was cognitively intact. Further review under Functional Status reflected the need for supervision with…
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 before2021-08-13 · 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 provide respiratory care in accordance with professional standards for 2 (Resident #499 and Resident #17) of 3 residents sampled for respiratory care. Findings included: 1. A review of Resident #499's Physician's Orders revealed that Resident #499 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). A review of Resident #499's Physician's Orders revealed an order, dated 08/03/2021, for continuous oxygen at 4 liters per minute (lpm) via nasal cannula. A review of Resident #499's Care Plan revealed a problem, revised on 08/05/2021, that Resident #499 had Emphysema/COPD. Interventions included continuous oxygen via nasal prongs at 4 lpm (liters per minute), monitor for difficulty breathing on exertion, and monitor/document any signs and symptoms of respiratory infection. An observation was conducted on 08/10/2021 at 11:47 AM in Resident #499's room. A nasal cannula with oxygen tubing 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 · D2021-08-13 · tag F0732 — isolatedPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to post the current Nurse Staffing Information to include all shifts for the day/night, the resident census, and numbers of each disciplined nursing staff for each shift, during one of four days observed, (8/10/2021). It was observed that the facility had the Daily Staffing Sheet posted and displayed with a date of four days prior. Findings included: On 8/10/2021 6:02 a.m., the front lobby doors were approached from the outside parking lot. Upon reaching the doors, they were observed locked. A sign on the door indicated to call a number to have someone come to the front door to let anyone in. The number was called and a staff member, Nurse Employee B indicated she would be right up to the door. At 6:06 a.m. Employee B came to the front door. However, another staff member let the team inside the facility. Upon entering the facility, Employee B was notified of the team and the visit reason. She indicates she was in charge during the current shift and is actually the North unit manager during the days. While Employee B 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 · Dcited before2021-08-13 · 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, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a medication administration error rate below 5%. A total of 31 administration opportunities were observed with 4 errors for 4 (Resident #2, Resident #81, Resident #92 and Resident #502) of 5 residents observed for medication administration, resulting in a medications administration error rate of 12.9%. Findings included: An observation of medication administration was conducted on 08/12/2021 at 08:55 AM with Staff A, Registered Nurse (RN) on the 500 unit of the facility. The following medications were administered to Resident #92 during the observation: - Multi Vitamin with Minerals 1 tablet by mouth. - Aspirin 81 milligrams (mg) by mouth. - Fluticasone propionate and salmeterol inhalation powder 250 micrograms (mcg)-50 mcg/dose 1 puff inhalation. - Celexa 20 mg by mouth. - Losartan 25 mg by mouth. - Metformin 500 mg by mouth. - Metoprolol 25 mg by mouth. - Artificial tears solution 1 drop in each eye. After verifying Resident #92's medications, Staff A, RN entered the resident's room and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2021-08-13 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolatedEnsure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, interviews, observation, and policy review the facility did not ensure services were obtained to determine the appropriate therapeutic diet for one resident (#64) of nine residents receiving hospice care at the facility. Findings included: Resident #64 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to, heart failure, type II diabetes mellitus, and Afib (atrial fibrillation), according to the face sheet in the admission record. A review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], reflected a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, indicating Resident #64 was cognitively intact. Further review under Functional Status reflected the need for supervision with set up help for eating. A review of Section K, Swallowing/Nutritional Status, revealed Resident #64 did not have a swallowing disorder at the time of the assessment, nor was he receiving a therapeutic diet. Review of Section O, Special Treatments, Procedures, and Programs…
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 before2021-08-13 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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, interviews, record reviews, review of facility policy, and review of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines, the facility failed to implement and maintain an infection prevention and control program to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 by 1.) failing to post appropriate signage related to transmission based precautions on 2 resident rooms (406 and 408) of 11 resident rooms under transmission based precautions, 2.) failing to ensure that two staff members (H, A) donned appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) before entering the rooms of 2 resident's rooms (606 and 608) of 11 resident rooms on transmission based precautions, 3.) failing to ensure that PPE was doffed by 3 staff members (G, H, A) prior to exiting the rooms of 2 residents (406 and 606) of 11 resident rooms under transmission based precautions, 4.) two staff members (H, W) failing to wear protective face masks properly throughout the facility in 2 hallways (200 and 600) of 6 hallways in 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 · D2021-08-13 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure resident traffic areas and resident spaces were kept safe during three of four days observed (8/10/2021, 8/11/2021, and 8/12/2201). It was determined that a large remote air conditioner handler was plugged into an extension cord, which was stretched out causing a non-safe walking area. Two (#65, #69) of seven total residents that were ambulatory were observed to be walking near the cords. Findings included: On 8/10/2021 from 6:10 a.m. through to at least 2:00 p.m. the North wing was toured and observed on the main floor, across from the nurse station and next to the soiled utility room, there was a large satellite air conditioner handler with tubing leading from the machine and going up through ceiling tiles. Interview with the floor staff had all indicated the air conditioning was not working well on the hallways and this unit has been placed in this spot for about three weeks or so. The unit was observed in an area where staff and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2025-08-21 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespreadDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observations, and interviews, the facility failed to dispose of garbage and refuse appropriately. The findings included: Upon arriving to the facility, on 08/18/25 at 8:25 AM, it was noted that the trash dumpster appeared to be overflowing and there was an accumulation of trash and debris on the ground around the dumpster. At the time of the observation, the Director of Nursing (DON) was outside. Upon entering the facility, on 08/18/25 at 8:30 AM, the surveyor explained the concern to the DON to which the DON acknowledged. On 08/19/25 at approximately 8:00 AM, the dumpster area was visible through a window at the end of the 500 unit. It was noted that the accumulation of trash and refuse had not been cleaned up.
“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
$77,880 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $77,880 — penalty dated 2025-08-07
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to EXCELSIOR CARE GROUP — 33 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 | 2 of 5 | 2.5 | -0.5 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
The other 32 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.5★, per CMS)
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 | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LAKE PARKER SNF OPERATIONS HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 09/03/2021 |
| SUNSHINE SNF GROUP LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 09/30/2021 |
| LEIFER, JOEL | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/01/2022 |
| BUTLER, DAVID | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/31/2025 |
| GANT, AMBER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/08/2026 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 7 rows in the source record cover these 5 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.
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 $2.8M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 24% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in FL
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 105693. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-21, 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.