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

Okeechobee Health Care Facility

1646 Highway 441 N, Okeechobee, FL 34972 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 210 certified beds · (863) 763-2226 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (863) 763-2226 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 8 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (23% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
  • its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions

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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 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, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS
Urgent care / clinic
208 NE 7th Ave · (863) 623-3145 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
2101 S Parrott Ave · (863) 467-7169 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
4340 SE 26th St · (863) 763-1914 · Call to confirm hours
Park
3909 US Highway 441 SE · (863) 248-4887 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
4209 US Highway 441 SE · (561) 541-7087

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 5 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 improved from 3 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased3.5%8.7%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.9%5.5%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.3%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%0.7%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%4.6%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.3%2.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened4.2%9.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication14.8%14.4%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%99.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.4%4.5%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control4.6%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 table14.8%8.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.5%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission16.8%26.1%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit9.5%9.1%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.222.131.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.451.151.80better

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

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

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

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

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

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

43.8% 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 269 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

43.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
8.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
67.7%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.29U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.10hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.17hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 67.7% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 186 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 0.29 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 45% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 19% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF43.8%CMS range 37.9–49.751.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF8.4%CMS range 6.2–10.510.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge67.7%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge62.9%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge58.6%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge97.6%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.8%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.8%CMS range 5.5–11.57.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.391.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.80
RN hours/ resident / day
0.89
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.56
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.25
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.60
RN hoursweekends
23.0%
Total nursing turnover
17.2%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 210 beds and averages 192.0 residents a day — about 91% occupied, or roughly 18 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 4.25 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.80 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.56 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 3.86 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.41 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.89 to 0.60 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 23% is below the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

6
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-04-25)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2023-02-09)

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.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

  • Potential for harm · F2024-04-25 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — widespread
    Provide sufficient support personnel to safely and effectively carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service.
    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, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure adequate kitchen staff to provide timely meal delivery as per schedule for 2 of 2 meals observed (lunch and dinner on 04/24/24), affecting 11 of 41 sampled residents (Residents #172, #85, #87, #129, #18, #157, #41, #96, #135, #53, and #193). This failure could potentially affected all 196 residents who consume food orally in the facility at the time of the survey. The census at the time of survey was 198 residents. The findings included: 1. Review of the policy, titled, Timely Meal Service and Mealtimes Frequency, (not dated), documented, in part, the following: Policy: Food will be delivered promptly at allotted times to ensure safe, palatable, and high-quality food is serviced at the proper temperature. Review of the Food Services Cart Delivery Schedule provided upon request documented the specific times each food cart was to leave the kitchen to be delivered to the specific unit. Each unit had two to five carts…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2024-04-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to provide foods prepared in a safe and sanitary manner in accordance with professional standards for food safety. The findings included: 1. During the initial kitchen tour, on 04/22/24 at 8:50 AM, accompanied by the Dietary Consultant and the Food Service Manager, the following observations were noted: a. Upon entering the kitchen and approaching the hand washing sink to perform hand hygiene, there was 'used ice' in the hand washing sink. Staff M, Dietary Aide, stated ice was used as a cooling medium for cold holding of cartons of milk in a bus tub and then dumped in the hand washing sink. b. There was an accumulation of food residue in the blades of produce slicers. c. There was an accumulation of food residue on the underside of the stand mixer d. The internal temperature of a 6-inch deep one third sized pan of gravy was 46 degrees Fahrenheit (F). The pan of gravy was in the process of cooling from the previous day's dinner meal, as reported by Staff N, Dietary Aide e. Upon entering the dish washing area…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-04-25 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
    Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
    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, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure palatable food and food served at a proper temperature for 9 of 41 sampled residents, Residents #172, #25, #109, #193, #195, #96, #135, #182, and #17. The findings included: 1. Review of the policy, titled, Timely Meal Service and Mealtimes Frequency, (not dated), documented, in part: Policy: Food will be delivered promptly at allotted times to ensure safe, palatable, and high-quality food is serviced at the proper temperature. Review of the Food Preparation Guidelines, reviewed 09/22/23, documented, in part: Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines: . 3. Food and drink shall be palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature. Strategies to ensure resident satisfaction include: a. Providing meals that are varied in color and texture. b. Using spices or herbs to season food in accordance with recipes. c. Serving hot foods/drinks hot and cold foods/drinks cold. d. Addressing resident complaints about foods/drinks.…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-25 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure timely and proper care and services for 3 of 30 sampled residents, as evidenced by: Nursing staff failed to ensure administration of the full dose of an anti-viral medication (Paxlovid) for Resident #10; failed to assess and treat edema for Resident #82; and failed to timely treat constipation for Resident #85. The findings included: 1. Review of the record revealed Resident #10 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], and resided in her current room in the memory care unit since 04/27/23. Review of a progress note dated 02/09/24 at 12:21 AM revealed the resident tested positive for the COVID-19 virus. Review of the audit reports for the pharmacy orders for Paxlovid revealed the following: a) A verbal order was entered on 02/09/24 at 12:13 PM, twelve hours after testing positive for the virus, and electronically signed by the physician on 02/10/24 at 7:35 AM, for the administration of Paxlovid twice daily for five days, and then…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-04-25 · tag F0849 — isolated
    Arrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and incorporate an integrated care plan for the hospice services for 1 of 1 sampled resident reviewed for Hospice, Resident #506. The findings included: Review of the facility's Hospice-Nursing Facility Services Agreement dated 08/30/22 included in part under Agreements, the following: 2. Responsibilities of Facility (e) Coordination of Care - For Routine Care (i) Design of Hospice Plan of Care. In accordance with applicable federal and state laws and regulations, Facility shall coordinate with Hospice in developing a Hospice Plan of Care for each Hospice Patient that is consistent with the hospice philosophy and is responsive to the unique needs of each Hospice Patient and his or her expressed desire for hospice care. Hospice retains primary responsibility for determining each Hospice Patient Plan of Care will identify which provider is responsible for performing the respective functions that have been agreed upon and included in…

    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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-02-09 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure an order was obtained to check for wander guard functioning and placement for 1 of 3 sampled residents reviewed (Resident #134); failed to ensure physician orders were followed regarding checking for wanderguard (a device designed to help protect memory care residents against elopement) functioning for 2 of 3 sampled residents reviewed for wanderguards (Residents #151 and #161); and failed to ensure a policy was in place for elopement and wanderguard maintenance. The findings included: 1. Review of Resident #134's record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE] and diagnoses that included the following: Bipolar disorder, current episode manic with psychotic features; History of Urinary Tract Infection (UTI); Hypertension (HTN); Cognitive Communication Deficit; Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety; and Dementia with Behavioral Disturbance. Review of the resident's Minimum Data Set (MDS) last quarterly assessment completed on 11/01/22…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-02-09 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    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 policy review, observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide appropriate perineal care (the process of washing the genital and rectal area) to residents with history of urinary tract infection (UTI) for 1 of 1 sampled resident reviewed, Resident #77. The findings included: Policy review, titled, perineal care, revised 08/11/22, indicated, in part, it is the practice of this facility to provide perineal care to all incontinent residents during routine bath and as needed in order to promote cleanliness and comfort, prevent infection to the excess possible, and to prevent and assess for skin breakdown. Perineal care refers to care of the external genitalia and the anal area. Policy explanation and compliance guidelines included: gather supplies needed. a) Basin method: filled no more than 2/3 full of warm water. Wash clothes, towels, toilet paper, perineal cleanser, drape (if applicable), gloves and other relevant personal protective equipment. B) disposable cleaning cloth…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · C2024-04-25 · tag F0732 — widespread
    Post nurse staffing information every day.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to have nurse staffing information posted daily. The findings included: Upon entering the facility on 04/22/24 at 8:30 AM, it was noted that the nurse staffing information was not posted. On 04/22/24 at approximately 1:30 PM, all members of the survey team reported the nurse staffing information was not found during multiple tours of all units of the facility during the initial pool process. Upon returning to the facility on [DATE] at 6:45 AM, the nurse staffing information was not posted. On 04/23/24 at approximately 12:30 PM, all members of the survey team reported the nurse staffing information was not found during multiple tours of all units of the facility during the initial pool process. During an interview, on 04/24/24 at 2:45 PM with the Staffing Coordinator, when asked about the nurse staffing information being posted, the Staffing Coordinator replied, We haven't' been posting it for like a year. I don't have an explanation, I just thought that…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to VENTURA SERVICES — 14 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 53.2+1.8 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
Staffing 5 of 53.6+1.4 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.4+0.6 vs chain
The other 13 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
OKEECHOBEE OPCO HOLDINGS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 09/30/2021
AGRP 2011 TRUSTOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/01/2022
DEBORAH PHILIPSON 2011 FAMILY TRUSTOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/01/2022
PHILIPSON FAMILY LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/01/2022
PARITZKY, JEREMIEIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/01/2022
BENGIO, JACOBIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2022
EBANKS, PATRICIAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/31/2022
PHILIPSON, BENTIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/13/2025
PHILIPSON, GABRIELLEIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/13/2025
PHILIPSON, RAQUELIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/13/2025
RICHARDS MITCHELL & CROSS PAOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 03/01/2022
VENTURA SERVICES - FLORIDA, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 03/01/2022
NAEEM, TAHIRIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 03/01/2022

CMS files one row per role, so the 21 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

6 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.

$25.0M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+4.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$3.6M
Related-party expense15% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 71%Medicare 16%Other / private 13%

About 71% 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 $3.6M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 15% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$336per resident / day
operating cost
$10,216per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$351per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in FL

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Florida Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Florida
$10,342/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$12,167/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,610/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 105484. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-04-25, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next