Kendall Lakes Healthcare And Rehab Center
5280 SW 157 Avenue, Miami, FL 33185 · For profit - Corporation · 150 certified beds · (786) 433-7400 Medicare & Medicaid certified
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
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 | 5 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 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 held steady at 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 2.4% | 8.7% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.2% | 5.5% | 5.4% | better |
| 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 | 66.7% | 4.6% | 6.5% | check this† — see note marked dagger below the table |
| 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 | 1.8% | 2.5% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 1.2% | 9.5% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 11.5% | 14.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 99.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.2% | 4.5% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 0.3% | 10.5% | 21.2% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 8.3% | 8.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.3% | 1.5% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 94.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 24.7% | 26.1% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 5.3% | 9.1% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.67 | 2.13 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.67 | 1.15 | 1.80 | better |
† This value is several times the typical-state benchmark. It can be real, or it can be a coding artifact in what the facility submitted. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
39.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 352 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 76.0% 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 225 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 0.65 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 90% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 20% 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 | 39.3%CMS range 34.6–45.3 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.4%CMS range 8.1–13.1 | 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 | 76.0% | 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 | 75.6% | 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 | 66.2% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 99.8% | 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 | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 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 | 0.2% | 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 | 9.2%CMS range 6.9–12.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.40 | 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 150 beds and averages 142.3 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.11 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.44 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.50 is at or above 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 3.72 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.27 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.57 to 1.10 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
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.
11 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-16 · 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 observation, record review an interviews, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision for one (Resident #1) out of three residents sampled for elopement; as evidenced by on 04/05/2025 Resident #1 a vulnerable resident left the facility undetected through the facility's first floor exit/entrance door; Resident #1 was found on the sidewalk several blocks from the facility by the local law enforcement and returned to the facility within twenty (20) minutes after last seen in the facility by staff. There were 139 residents residing in the facility at the time of the survey. The findings included: The facility's location is in a residential neighborhood with busy cross streets and close to a shopping plaza located 0.1 mile from the facility. The temperature on 04/05/2025 was 88 degrees Fahrenheit. according to https://www.accuweather.com. Review of the facility policy titled Elopements revision date 12/2002 states: Staff shall investigate and report on all cases of missing residents. Policy…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-18 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to promote residents' dignity and respect during dining for two (Resident #62, Resident #380) out of 33 sampled residents. As evidenced by facility staff observed standing while feeding residents who required assistance with meals. The findings included: 1) On 04/17/24 at 01:18 PM during dining observation of residents, surveyor observed the Speech Therapist (Staff A) standing while feeding Resident #62. Speech therapist (Staff A) was asked why he was standing while feeding the resident, Staff A stated he was not aware that he was not allowed to stand and feed the resident, he immediately got a chair that was in the room, placed it close to the resident's bedside and continued to feed the resident. Interview on 04/18/24 at 09:22 AM. The Director of Nursing (DON) stated all staff including the rehabilitation department have been trained and are aware that they are supposed to be sitting down while feeding the residents. Currently I am providing further education and in-service to the staff regarding feeding…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-18 · 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 observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure pharmacy procedures were followed as per facility policy and medication reconciliation procedures were followed for one out of four medication carts observed/reviewed. There were 139 residents residing in the facility at the time of the survey. The findings included: On 04/17/24 at 10:01 AM during routine observation the surveyor observed the 400 Unit Medication Cart # 1, computer screen opened to resident's medication screen and the medication cart was unlocked in the 400-406 hallway, no staff in attendance at the cart; surveyor went looking for the assigned Registered Nurse (Staff C), Staff C was found in front of room [ROOM NUMBER], and stated she was sorry the cart was left unlocked and unattended, and it was her mistake. On 04/17/24 at 11:50 AM During medication cart observation with Registered Nurse (Staff D) assigned to the 500-unit Medication Cart #3. The narcotic count for Resident #87 was incorrect-The count on the bingo…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-18 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolatedMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure the lint screens for two out of three dryers observed in the laundry room were cleaned as per facility protocol. There were 139 residents residing in the facility at the time of the survey. The findings included: On 04/17/24 at 09:23 AM during an observational tour of the laundry area by two surveyors on the team with the facility's Infection Preventionist (Staff B) and the Director of housekeeping, the lint screens of two out of three clothes dryers were checked and observed covered in a thick layer of lint. Each dryer has a load capacity of 150 pounds and was in working order. On 4/17/24 at 9:40AM, the Director of housekeeping acknowledged that the lint screens for the two dryers were full of lint and was not cleaned, the lint log posted on the wall opposite the dryers documented-the lint screens were last cleaned on 4/17/24 at 9:00 AM. The Director of Housekeeping stated that the dryer lint screens are supposed to be cleaned every hour by the staff on duty. Review of the undated facility policy…
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 · D2022-12-08 · 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 observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain a quiet homelike environment for 1 of 3 sampled residents for oxygen use (Resident #117). The findings included: Resident #117 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] documented the resident had severe cognitive impairment, required extensive one-person assist with activities of daily living, and required the use of oxygen. An observation of the 500 unit was conducted on 12/05/22 at 10:00 AM. A loud humming noise was heard coming from Resident #117's room. Upon entering Resident #117's room, surveyor observed the resident receiving oxygen by nasal cannula. Further observation revealed the loud noise was coming from the oxygen concentrator (device that delivers oxygen). An interview was conducted with Staff G, a Licensed Practical Nurse, on 12/05/22 at 12:00 PM. Surveyor was walking down the 500 unit hallway with Staff G. Staff G acknowledged the loud humming sound heard in the hallway was coming from…
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 · D2022-12-08 · 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 interviews, observations, and record review, the facility failed to aid during dining for 1 of 1 sampled resident reviewed for Activities of Daily Livings (ADLs) (Resident #111). The findings included: In an observation conducted on 12/06/22 at 8:00 AM, Resident #111 was noted eating her breakfast tray with no staff in the room. At 8:10 AM, Resident #111 was still eating with no assistance from staff and consumed about 50 percent of her breakfast meal. In an observation conducted on 12/06/22 at 12:04 PM, Resident #111 was in the room with the lunch tray at her bedside, and no staff was noted. At 12:15 PM, she ate 10% of her lunch meal, and no staff member was in the room to assist her with her lunch. Continued observation at 12:20 PM showed that she ate 25% of her meal with no staff in the room. (photographic evidence obtained) A chart review showed that Resident #111 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of Dysphagia, Dementia, and Anemia. The MDS (Minimum Data Set) dated 09/05/22 showed that under…
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 · D2022-12-08 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
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 proper use of splints per physician's order for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for splints (Resident #74 and 122). The findings included: 1) During the initial tour of the facility conducted on 12/05/22 at 9:40 AM, the surveyor noted Resident #74 was wearing splints on both of her hands while lying in bed. Clinical records revealed Resident #74 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #74 had a medical history significant for Parkinson's disease, fibromyalgia, depression, anxiety, dementia, and contractures of her hands and ankles. A Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) was done on 09/20/22. This MDS documented Resident #74 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5, which indicates she had severe cognitive impairment. This MDS also documented Resident #74 required extensive assistance from staff for all activities of daily living. Review of Resident #74's Care Plans revealed there was a care plan in place regarding…
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 · D2022-12-08 · 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 follow tube feeding orders for 1 out of 7 sampled residents reviewed for tube feeding (resident #58). The findings included: A review of the facility ' s policy titled Enteral Tube Feeding via Continuous Pump, revised in March 2115, showed to position the head of the bed at 30-45 degrees for feeding unless medically contradicted. It further showed to check the label on the enteral formula against the physician's order. A review of the Physician's orders for Resident #58 revealed a Physician's order dated 07/25/22 for tube feeding Osmolite 1.5 (formulary type) at 60 milliliters (ml) per hour for 20 hours via peg tube, held from 8:00 AM to 1:00 PM. Another order dated 06/18/22 to elevate the Head of the bed at least 30-45 degrees while feeding is in progress. In an observation conducted on 12/05/22 at 9:15 AM, Resident #58 was noted in bed. Closer observation showed a tube feeding that was on hold with Osmolite 1.5 at 60 ml an hour 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 · D2022-12-08 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to follow Physician's orders and failed to update dialysis care plan for discontinued fluid restrictions for 1 out of resident reviewed for dialysis (Resident #47). The findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled Policy and Procedure: Fluid Restrictions dated 08/07/20, included the following: Fluid restrictions may be utilized to assist in controlling body fluid balance, when a resident's clinical condition warrants. Fluid is only restricted when clinically necessary, and for a limited time, when possible, to preserve resident quality of life. A specific physician's order for the amount of fluids to be provided in a 24-hour period is required. When an order is received for fluid restriction, the dietary manager or dietician confers with the nursing department to determine how much fluid each department is to provide. This is based on the number of medications ordered, as well as the total fluid volume permitted. The Food…
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 · D2022-12-08 · 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
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure proper storage of medications for Resident #26 and 69. The findings included: Review of the facility policy titled Storage of Medications, revision date 08/2020 revealed the following: Medications and biologicals are stored safely, securely, and properly. Also, Only licensed nurses, pharmacy personnel, and those lawfully authorized to administer medications are permitted to access medications. 1) During the initial tour of the facility conducted on 12/05/22 at 9:25 AM, the surveyor found a bottle of prescription shampoo in the bathroom of Resident #26 (photographic evidence obtained). A review of Resident #26's record revealed a Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) was done on 10/27/22. This MDS documented Resident #26 had a Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, which indicates she had mild cognitive impairment. This MDS also documented Resident #26 required extensive assistance from staff members for personal hygiene and transfers-this indicates she was unable to shower herself. Review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-12-08 · 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
Based on observation and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety, including holding cold foods at regulatory temperature and using personal items in the food production area. The findings include the following: In a tour of the central kitchen conducted during lunch tray line observation on 12/07/22 at 11:35 AM, the following was noted: 1. The facility's Certified Dietary Manager was observed using the facility's calibrated thermometer. The temperature of a tossed salad was taken and showed to be at 60.4 degrees Fahrenheit, and another tossed salad showed a temperature of 59.3 degrees Fahrenheit. This had the potential to affect the other 13 tossed salads that were noted in the reach-in refrigerator. (photographic evidence obtained) 2. The facility's Certified Dietary Manager was observed using the facility's calibrated thermometer. The temperature of the fruit salad was taken and showed to be 55.7 degrees Fahrenheit, and another fruit salad showed 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.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to GOLD FL TRUST II — 36 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 | 5 of 5 | 3.4 | +1.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 5 of 5 | 2.8 | +2.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
The other 35 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.4★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| KENDALL LAKES SNF HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 03/23/2022 |
| FL MASTER OPCO HOLDCO LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 07/27/2022 |
| MARIN, LEYLA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | — | since 07/27/2022 |
| SHELBY, JACK | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 07/27/2022 |
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.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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, FY2024). 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 686123. 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.