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

Bridgeview Center

350 S Ridgewood Avenue, Ormond Beach, FL 32174 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 139 certified beds · (386) 677-4545 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (386) 677-4545 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 9 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 strong health-inspection score (4/5) — 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
Worth asking about
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • about 27% 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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
279 S Yonge St · (386) 673-2133 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Walgreens1.0 mi
1829 Ridgewood Ave · (386) 672-6388 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
347 W Granada Blvd · (386) 281-3007 · Call to confirm hours
Park
176 Division Ave · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating4★
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 increased13.9%8.7%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.4%5.5%5.4%worse
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 symptoms0.3%4.6%6.5%better
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 injury5.4%2.5%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened12.5%9.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication22.9%14.4%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%99.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.6%4.5%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control18.4%10.5%21.2%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table32.9%8.6%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication6.4%1.5%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission15.5%26.1%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit3.0%9.1%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.592.131.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.391.151.80better

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.

43.1% 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 102 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

43.1%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
51.4%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.30U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.09hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.16hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 51.4% 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 70 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 49% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% 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 SNF43.1%CMS range 33.2–50.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.8%CMS range 7.4–14.610.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge51.4%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 discharge64.3%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 discharge25.7%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 identified99.0%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 setting95.8%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 discharge87.5%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 stay0.0%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 worsened1.0%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 hospitalization10.7%CMS range 7.1–15.07.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.001.02Oct 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

0.33
RN hours/ resident / day
0.99
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.05
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.37
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.21
RN hoursweekends
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 139 beds and averages 115.5 residents a day — about 83% occupied, or roughly 24 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.37 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.33 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.05 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 3.04 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.50 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.38 to 0.21 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-12-05)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2023-01-12)

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.

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.

9 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · E2025-09-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
    Ensure 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 observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure that the residents environment remained as free of accident hazards as is possible by failing to 1) assess Resident #7 for smoking safety and 2) failing to supervise Resident #8 during smoking, from a sample of three residents reviewed for smoking, from a total sample of 7 residents who smoked.The findings include:1. On 8/4/25 at 3:45 pm, Resident #7 was observed smoking in the lobby. He was on oxygen via nasal canula, and his portable oxygen tank was at the back of his wheelchair. The receptionist was observed turning off the oxygen tank and removing the canula from the resident's nose. She then wheeled the resident to the designated smoking area near the lobby but left the oxygen tank at the back of his wheelchair.A clinical record review for Resident #7 indicated he was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), dementia, unspecified…

    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 · D2024-12-05 · tag F0645 — isolated
    PASARR 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 and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure the completion of a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) for one (Resident #9) of two residents selected for PASRR review, from a total survey sample of 23 residents. The findings include: A review of Resident #9's medical record revealed that he was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. No PASRR was found for the resident's 1/17/2023 admission. Further review of the resident's record revealed that he was admitted with diagnoses including, but not limited to, dementia in other diseases classified elsewhere, unspecified severity, with other behavioral disturbance; major depressive disorder; schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type; brief psychotic disorder, and other specified persistent mood disorders. On 12/04/24 at 1:30 PM, the Director of Nursing (DON) was asked to provide Resident #9's admission PASRR. She provided a PASRR dated 2016. On 12/05/24 at 9:00 AM, the DON was asked if a more recent PASRR had been completed. She…

    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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-08-01 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide 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 review, and facility policy and procedure review, the facility's failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. The facility failed to follow isolation guidelines for COVID 19 for five (Residents #1, #2, #3, #4, and #5) of seven residents who were positive for COVID 19, from a total sample of 9 residents. Failure to follow proper infection control standards increases the risk of adverse health outcomes for facility residents, staff, and other facility occupants. The findings include: On 7/29/24 at 10:00 am, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) A was observed passing medication to Resident #1. A sign on the door noted Resident #1 was on droplet precaution. LPN A was observed wearing a surgical mask below her chin and had no gown or gloves. She was standing at the door interacting with Resident #1 who was sitting in his chair near the door less than one foot from LPN A. When…

    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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-18 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    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 medical record review, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure the resident care plan for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for falls, was revised to reflect new interventions for risk of injury due to recent falls. Failing to revise care plans places the residents at risk of not receiving appropriate care. The findings include: A review of Resident #1's medical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a re-entry on 12/5/23 with diagnoses of muscle wasting, unsteadiness on feet, unspecified dementia, and Parkinson's disease. Further review of Resident #1's medical record revealed she had falls in the facility on 11/8/23, 11/19/23, 12/4/23, and 1/9/24. A review of Resident #1's care plan initiated on 8/30/22 revealed she was at risk for falls with a goal to minimize risk for injury related to falls with interventions in place. However, interventions were noted to remain the same, and no documentation was found to support the facility had…

    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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-08-08 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — pattern
    Make 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure eight (132, 126, 124, 125, 216, 212, 214, and 115) of thirteen resident bedroom privacy curtains observed were maintained to ensure a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents. The findings include: 1. A visit to room [ROOM NUMBER] on 08/08/2023 at 10:28 AM, found the privacy curtain in the bedroom area to have multiple reddish-brown splatters on it. (Photographic evidence obtained) 2. A visit to room [ROOM NUMBER] on 08/08/2023 at 10:39 AM, found the privacy curtain in the bedroom area to have multiple reddish-brown splatters on it. (Photographic evidence obtained) 3. A visit to room [ROOM NUMBER] on 08/08/2023 at 10:44 AM, found the privacy curtain in the bedroom area to have multiple reddish-brown splatters on it. (Photographic evidence obtained) 4. A visit to room [ROOM NUMBER] on 08/08/2023 at 10:48 AM, found the privacy curtain in the bedroom area to have multiple reddish-brown splatters…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-01-12 · tag F0582 — isolated
    Give residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review and an interview with the Social Worker, the facility failed to keep complete records of Notice of Medicare Non-coverage (NOMNC) and Advance Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage (ABN) for two (Residents #30 and #40) of six sampled residents, discharged within the last six months, from a Medicare A-covered stay with benefit days remaining. The findings include: A review of six residents' records with remaining Medicare Part A days, revealed that two residents (#30 and #40) had missing signatures on both the NOMNC and ABN forms. (Copies obtained) The signature areas had no information or date on either form. The two residents' ABN forms did not have an Options box selected, a signature, or a date of contact on them. On the NOMNC forms for the two residents, the signature area and date areas were blank. This form had an additional information (optional) area filled out, but did not indicate whether the residents had declined, planned to appeal, or were not available to sign the forms. A receipt for certified mail was given, but there was no verification 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-01-12 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolated
    Make sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one (Resident #231) of 39 sampled residents had access to the call light while in bed. The findings include: An observation was made of Resident #231 on 1/9/23 at 1:05 PM. She was in a double room in the bed nearest to the window and she had no roommate. No call light was seen near or next to the resident. She was asked where her call light was, but she was not able to locate it. During this time the call light was observed pinned to her privacy curtain. (Photographic evidence obtained) A second observation of resident #231's room on 1/9/23 at 2:20 PM. The call light was still hanging from the privacy curtain near the wall and out of the resident's reach. At this time Certified Nursing Assistant N was interviewed and reported that she had clipped the call light on the curtain 5 to 10 minutes ago. When asked where the call light should be in relation to resident, she stated, within reach of resident. On 1/11/23 at 12:25 PM, Resident #231's call light was observed on the floor out of reach of 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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-05-28 · 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 record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices related to skin care for one of 43 residents. (Resident #28) The findings include: Record review for Resident #28 revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with his most recent readmission on [DATE]. A review of the care plan, revised on 5/20/2021, revealed the following: Focus: Resident is at risk for alteration in skin integrity related to hygiene issues, incontinence, dementia, diabetes, dandruff on scalp, boil on abdomen. Goal: Will receive appropriate services and treatments to minimize potential skin breakdown, and will implement interventions to minimize the risk of skin impairment through next review, and facial rash will continue to improve within two weeks. Interventions: apply moisture, observe skin with ADLs (activities of daily living) and report…

    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 · D2021-05-28 · tag F0694 — isolated
    Provide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids 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 record review, observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to follow physician orders for the administration of intravenous therapy (IV) for 1 of 1 residents sampled for IV administration from a total sample of 43. (Resident #2) The findings include: A record review for Resident #2 revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including a fractured right femur and a urinary tract infection (UTI). The admission nursing note revealed she had a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC line) to the mid-right arm for administration of intravenous (IV) antibiotics. A review of a 5/10/2021 physician's order revealed: Ceftriaxone (antibiotic) 2 grams IV every 24 hours via the PICC line, infuse over 30 minutes; Vancomycin (antibiotic) 1 gram every 12 hours IV, infuse over 60 minutes; flush PICC line with normal saline 0.9% solution 10 ml (milliliters) IV every shift. Also change the PICC line dressing every 5-7 days. A review of the May 2021 Medication Administration Record…

    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
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 ASTON HEALTH — 38 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 4 of 52.7+1.3 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.5+1.5 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 52.2-1.2 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.1+0.9 vs chain
The other 37 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.7★, per CMS)
1 of 5Crescent Health And Rehabilitation CenterSarasota, FL 1 of 5Kensington Gardens Rehab And Nursing CenterClearwater, FL 1 of 5Nursing & Rehabilitation Center Of New Port RicheyNew Port Richey, FL 1 of 5Oak Haven Rehab And Nursing CenterAuburndale, FL 1 of 5Vero Beach Care CenterVero Beach, FL 2 of 5Baya Pointe Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterLake City, FL 2 of 5Capri Health And Rehabilitation CenterVenice, FL 2 of 5Creekside Health And Rehabilitation CenterSarasota, FL 2 of 5Fairway Oaks CenterTampa, FL 2 of 5Flagler Health And Rehabilitation CenterBunnell, FL 2 of 5Haines City Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterHaines City, FL 2 of 5Highlands Lake CenterLakeland, FL 2 of 5Indian River CenterWest Melbourne, FL 2 of 5North Port Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterNorth Port, FL 2 of 5Pensacola Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterPensacola, FL 2 of 5Riverwood CenterJacksonville, FL 2 of 5Sandgate Gardens Rehab And Nursing CenterFort Pierce, FL 2 of 5Sea Breeze Rehab And Nursing CenterVero Beach, FL 2 of 5Tierra Pines CenterLargo, FL 2 of 5Viera Del Mar Health And Rehabilitation CenterViera, FL 2 of 5Winter Garden Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterWinter Garden, FL 3 of 5Cedarbrook Health And Rehabilitation CenterFort Myers, FL 3 of 5Coquina CenterOrmond Beach, FL 3 of 5Eagleridge Health And Rehabilitation CenterFort Myers, FL 3 of 5Fouraker Hills Rehab And Nursing CenterJacksonville, FL 3 of 5Hillside Health And Rehabilitation CenterZephyrhills, FL 3 of 5Oakpark Health And Rehabilitation CenterPalm Harbor, FL 4 of 5Coastal Health And Rehabilitation CenterDaytona Beach, FL 4 of 5Debary Health And Rehabilitation CenterDebary, FL 4 of 5Fernandina Beach Rehabilitation And Nursing CenterFernandina Beach, FL 4 of 5Island Lake CenterLongwood, FL 4 of 5Meadowpark Health And Rehabilitation CenterDunedin, FL 4 of 5Parkside Health And Rehabilitation CenterDeland, FL 4 of 5Ruleme CenterEustis, FL 4 of 5Seaside Health And Rehabilitation CenterDaytona Beach, FL 5 of 5Bayview CenterEustis, FL 5 of 5Osprey Point Nursing CenterBushnell, FL

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
KLEIN, SAMUELIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICER75%since 01/01/2021
BOESE, KALISHAIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/19/2023
THACKER, TRICIAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 04/05/2022

CMS files one row per role, so the 4 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

$13.0M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+30.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$2.5M
Related-party expense27% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 63%Medicare 9%Other / private 29%

This home reported $2.5M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 27% 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

$209per resident / day
operating cost
$6,354per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$302per 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 105402. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-12-05, 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