Anchor Care & Rehabilitation Center
1515 Port Malabar Blvd NE, Palm Bay, FL 32905 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 120 certified beds · (321) 723-1235 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Aug 2024
- inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $14,852 in federal fines (most recent 2024-08-30)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- about 22% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 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 1 to 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 9.2% | 8.7% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.2% | 5.5% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.2% | 0.3% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.3% | 0.7% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 5.2% | 4.6% | 6.5% | better |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.2% | 2.5% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 15.4% | 9.5% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 12.9% | 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 | 4.4% | 4.5% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 6.4% | 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 | 3.3% | 8.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.7% | 1.5% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.9% | 94.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 31.9% | 26.1% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 11.5% | 9.1% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 4.27 | 2.13 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.12 | 1.15 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ 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.
36.2% 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 46 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 48.7% 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 78 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 0.27 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 40% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 41% 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 | 36.2%CMS range 25.6–49.7 | 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 | 11.0%CMS range 7.5–14.4 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 48.7% | 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 | 46.1% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 33.3% | 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 | 98.5% | 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 | 58.1% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.7% | 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 | 3.6% | 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 | 8.2%CMS range 4.7–12.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.00 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 115.5 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.49 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.29 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.09 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 3.22 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.60 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.31 to 0.24 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 42% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 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
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
16 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2024-08-30 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from neglect by their failure to ensure staff maintained a secure environment and implemented measures to mitigate the risk to prevent elopement for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for elopement, of a total sample of 5 residents, (#1). On 7/31/24 at approximately 7:48 PM, resident #1 left the facility unsupervised without the knowledge of staff. The resident walked along a busy roadway with a speed limit of 40 miles per hour and accepted a ride with strangers to get to her home. The facility staff were not aware of resident #1's whereabouts for approximately one hour and twenty minutes. Due to her cognitive deficits, and diagnosis of dementia, the elopement placed her at risk of falling, being severely injured, abducted, or hit by a motor vehicle. The facility's failure to provide adequate supervision and a secure environment contributed to resident #1's elopement and threatened all residents who were at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2024-08-30 · 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 interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the admission process was thoroughly completed by accurately evaluating and providing needed supervision to prevent elopement for 1 of 5 residents at risk for elopement, of a total sample of 5 residents, (#1). On 7/31/24 at approximately 7:48 PM, resident #1 left the facility unsupervised without the knowledge of staff. The resident walked along a busy roadway with a speed limit of 40 miles per hour and accepted a ride with strangers to get to her home. The facility staff were not aware of resident #1's whereabouts for approximately one hour and twenty minutes. Due to her cognitive deficits, and diagnosis of dementia, the elopement placed her at risk of falling, being severely injured, abducted, or hit by a motor vehicle. The driving distance from the facility to resident #1's home was 2.7 to 3.0 miles away from the facility depending on the route taken, (retrieved on 9/16/24 from www.googlemaps.com). The temperature in Palm Bay on 7/31/24 at…
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 · E2025-06-12 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
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 provide a system for preventing and controlling infections and communicable diseases for residents by not offering hand hygiene to residents who ate in the dining rooms. This affected approximately 25 residents in the main dining room at lunch and 10 at dinner meals and approximately 10 residents in the small restorative dining room at the lunch meal each day. Findings: On 6/09/25 at 11:12 AM, 20 residents were located in the main dining room in preparation for lunch. Staff was observed as they put napkins on the tables for residents, but no hand hygiene was offered to residents before the meal. On 6/10/25 at 10:53 AM, 20 residents were again seated in the main dining room in preparation for lunch. Staff was seen placing linen tablecloths on the tables. At 11:07 AM, one staff member passed out napkins while another began the meal service by serving soup and another staff served beverages. By 11:13 AM, 25 residents total in the dining room had no hand hygiene offered prior to the meal. On 6/11/25 at 3:55 PM,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-12 · tag F0554 — isolatedAllow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
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 conduct medication self-administration assessment to ensure safety for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for self-administration of medications, of a total sample of 45 residents, (#62). Findings: Resident #62 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, essential hypertension, anemia, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and sepsis. Review of the Minimum Data Set quarterly assessment with assessment reference date of 5/02/25 revealed resident # 62 was cognitively intact. A review of resident #62's medical record revealed no physician's orders for eyedrops, no assessments for self-administration of medications nor did it contain a care plan which reflected self-administration and storage arrangements. On 6/11/25 at 9:40 AM, resident # 62 was observed in her room seated in a wheelchair with a bedside table in front of her. On the bedside table…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-12 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and residents' choices for two of two residents reviewed for call bells, of a total sample of 45 residents, (#80 and #259). Findings: 1. Resident #80 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] for hypertension, depression, insomnia, emphysema, and a urinary tract infection. According to the discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] for a short-term hospital stay, it indicated the resident was able to make his own decisions regarding tasks of daily life and was able to communicate in a logical and coherent manner. Resident #80's care plan indicated he was at high risk for falls, and his use of his call light was to be encouraged for standing, transferring and ambulation. There was a care plan which included resident was at risk for skin breakdown due to incontinence with an intervention to check for incontinence…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-12 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain the kitchen freezer (essential equipment), in safe operating condition. This had the potential to affect all 106 residents who ate meals at the facility. Findings: On 6/09/25 at 10:00 AM, during the kitchen tour with the Dietary Manager, it was noted in the walk-in freezer that ice [NAME] had built up on the evaporator and water was dripping onto the boxes stored below it. The Dietary Manager relocated approximately six boxes of food whose tops were covered in ice from the leak to a different shelf. She confirmed she needed to get with the maintenance department to have them come check out and repair the freezer. On 6/10/25 at 11:30 AM, the Director of Maintenance and Regional Manager of Maintenance stated they were not previously aware there was ice buildup and a leak from the evaporator in the freezer. They confirmed none of the kitchen staff had informed them of the issue, but said they would check it out. On 6/10/25 at 4:30…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2022-03-11 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — patternKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the facility's oxygen concentrator external filters were clean and in safe operating condition for 3 of 6 residents reviewed for respiratory care out of a total sample of 51 residents, (#37, #84, #197). Findings: Review of resident #37's medical record documented he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and Acute and Chronic Respiratory Failure Review of the physician's orders revealed oxygen at 4 liters (L) per minute via nasal cannula. Review of the 5 day Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented resident received oxygen therapy. Review of resident #37's plan of care for at risk for cardiovascular complications dated 07/20/20 with intervention to administer oxygen as ordered. Observations conducted on 03/07/22 at 2:43 PM, 03/08/22 at 10:37 AM and on 03/09/22 at 10:21 AM revealed the oxygen concentrator's external filter was covered with gray…
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 · D2022-03-11 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
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 interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide showers as per resident's preferences and as per shower schedule for 2 of 8 residents reviewed for choices, out of a total sample of 51 residents, (#84 #34). Findings: 1. Review of resident #84's medical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Cerebral Vascular Accident (CVA), Epilepsy, Diabetes Mellitus, Metabolic Encephalopathy, Acute Respiratory Failure and Morbid Obesity. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed she was cognitively intact, required extensive assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and total assistance with bathing. Review of the plan of care documented resident #84 was at risk for decreased ability to perform ADL's with bathing, grooming, personal hygiene and transfers related to CVA and interventions to transfer resident using mechanical lift with 2 staff members. On 03/07/22 at 1:46 PM, resident #84 stated, I would like to have a shower but…
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 · D2022-03-11 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
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 interview, the facility failed to ensure prompt investigation and timely resolution of concerns for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for grievances, out of a total sample of 51 residents, (#1). Findings: Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included stroke, type 2 diabetes, speech and language deficit, muscle weakness and adult failure to thrive. On 3/10/22 at 11:15 AM, resident #1 stated during her stay in the facility, a suitcase which contained her birth certificate, passport and resident alien identification card had been lost when she was moved to another room. She explained the facility replaced the suitcase in December 2021, over a year after it was lost. She stated none of the contents of the suitcase were replaced. Resident #1 stated facility staff made several excuses. She said, They say they are waiting for corporate and waiting for the State. I don't know who corporate is. The resident stated she completed a grievance form 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.
- Potential for harm · D2022-03-11 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
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 interview and record review, the facility failed to complete Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessments within the required timeframe for 2 of 8 residents reviewed for MDS Assessments, of a total sample of 51 residents (#52 and #78). Findings: 1. Resident #52 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses to include quadriplegia, pressure ulcer on right and left buttocks. On 2/17/22 the resident was transferred from the facility to the hospital and returned to the facility on 2/21/22. Review of the MDS Discharge Return Anticipated assessment dated [DATE] and Entry assessment dated [DATE], revealed both assessments were marked still in progress. On 3/11/22 at 1:33 PM, MDS Coordinator D stated the MDS assessments should be completed within 14 days. She confirmed the Discharge Return Anticipated dated 2/17/22 should have been completed by 3/03/22 and the Entry assessment dated [DATE] should have been completed by 3/07/22. She said she had other job duties and did not always have…
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 · D2022-03-11 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments accurately reflected health conditions for 2 of 6 residents of a total sample of 51 residents, (#69, #55). Findings: Resident #69 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included cerebral atherosclerosis and dementia. The physician orders revealed an order to admit to Hospice dated 10/15/21. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] section O-Special Treatments, Procedures, and Programs reflected the Hospice section response was NO. Resident #55 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of heart disease, and hypertension. Review of the physician orders revealed an order for diuretic medication, Chlorthalidone daily to treat blood pressure and fluid retention. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed the resident received Chlorthalidone daily since 4/07/21. Review of the 5-day MDS assessment dated [DATE]…
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 · D2022-03-11 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to obtain a physician order for a positioning device recommended by Occupational Therapy, and failed to provide care and services for appropriate placement of the device, to prevent further decrease in range of motion for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for positioning and mobility out of a total sample of 51 residents, (#53). Findings: Resident #53 was admitted from the hospital on 8/15/19 with diagnoses including dementia, stroke with right side paralysis and weakness, muscle weakness, abnormal posture, and pain and stiffness in her right shoulder, elbow, and hand. Review of the Minimum Data Set Medicare End of Part A Stay assessment, with assessment reference date of 1/15/22 revealed resident #53 was totally dependent on two persons for assistance with activities of daily living. Section O of the MDS assessment showed the resident received neither Restorative Nursing Program (RNP) nor active and passive range of motion care and services. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2022-03-11 · tag F0694 — isolatedProvide 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) line dressing was changed as per professional standards of practice for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for infection of a total sample of 51 residents, (#149). Findings: Resident #149 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of osteomyelitis of vertebra, lumbar region, sepsis, hemoptysis, chronic pain syndrome, acute and subacute endocarditis, Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA), and chronic hepatitis. Physician's order dated 2/25/22 read, change PICC line dressing q (every) week and PRN (as needed). A PICC line is a thin, flexible tube that is inserted into a vein in the upper arm and guided (threaded) into a large vein above the right side of the heart .It is used to give intravenous fluids, blood transfusion .and other drugs. (retrieved from www.cancer.gov Definition of PICC 3/21/22) On 3/07/22 at 4:36 PM, and on 3/08/22 at 4:20 PM, observations showed…
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 · D2022-03-11 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure Oxygen (O2) therapy was administered as per physician's order for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for O2 therapy of a total sample of 51 residents, (#143). Findings: Resident #143 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of encephalopathy, sepsis, atherosclerotic heart disease, dementia without behavioral disturbance, acidosis, and anemia. Physician's order on 3/02/22 read, Oxygen at 3 liters/minute (L/M) via nasal cannula (NC) as needed for shortness of breath/for saturations below 92%. On 3/07/22 at 12:07 PM, and 2:39 PM, and on 3/08/22 at 11:37 AM, showed resident #143 lying in bed with his eyes closed. The oxygen concentrator was infusing at 2 L/M. On 3/08/22 at 11:41 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) K stated the resident was on oxygen at 2 L/M. The resident's physician's order was reviewed with LPN K and she verbalized the order was for oxygen at 3 L/M. The resident's O2 settings were observed with LPN K and she acknowledged the O2…
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 · D2022-03-11 · 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, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered within professional guidelines/parameters for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medication (#145) and failed to ensure intravenous antibiotics were administered as per physician order for 2 residents, (#149, #193) of a total sample of 51 residents. Findings: 1. Review of resident #193's medical record documented he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Pneumonia, Arteriosclerotic Heart Disease (ASHD), Esophageal Perforation, with Intraabdominal infection, Elevated [NAME] Blood Cell Count and Abscess of the Stomach. Review of the Medical Certification For Medicaid Long-Term Care Services and Patient Transfer Form (3008) dated 03/03/22 documented the resident ambulated independently, was able to transfer self and was partial weight-bearing. Review of resident #193's plan of care dated 03/07/22 for resident has an active PNA (Pneumonia) infection with intervention to…
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 · D2022-03-11 · tag F0791 — failed to provide routine dental services — isolatedProvide or obtain dental services for each resident.
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 obtain dental services for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for dental services out of a total sample of 51 residents, (#84). Findings: Review of resident #84's medical record documented she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Metabolic Encephalopathy, Epilepsy, Seizures, Cerebral Vascular Accident (CVA) and Acute Respiratory Failure. Review of the Annual Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented she had no cognitive issues, was on a mechanically altered/therapeutic diet and had obvious or likely cavity or broken teeth. Review of resident #84's plan of care noted resident had a dental or oral problem related to broken teeth dated 02/28/22. The goal included the resident to be free of infection, pain or bleeding in the oral cavity through review date of 06/03/22. The intervention included dental referral as needed. On 03/07/22 at 1:32 PM, resident #84 stated she had been missing her front bottom teeth…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$14,852 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $7,426 — penalty dated 2024-08-30
- $7,426 — penalty dated 2024-08-30
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to SIMCHA HYMAN & NAFTALI ZANZIPER — 79 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 | 4 of 5 | 2.6 | +1.4 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.7 | +1.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 3.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
The other 78 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.6★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 78; lowest-rated first.
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 | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| WINTON, JESSICA | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | since 04/01/2020 |
| GORELICK, BATYA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 04/01/2020 |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $2.6M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 22% 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
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in FL
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Florida Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 105464. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-12, 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.