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

Aviata At Palm Bay

5405 Babcock St NE, Palm Bay, FL 32905 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 120 certified beds · (321) 722-0660 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (321) 722-0660 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Apr 2024Resident-funds citation (F0567)1 actual-harm citation2 immediate-jeopardy citations CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$21,693 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

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)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Apr 2024
  • it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0567)
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • 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 (18) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $21,693 in federal fines (most recent 2024-04-05)

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) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
5270 Babcock St NE · (321) 241-6800 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
5245 Babcock St NE · (321) 409-1148 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
5270 Babcock St NE · (321) 728-1876 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1445 Norbert Rd NE · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
5330 Babcock St NE · (321) 727-1565

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 2 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 3 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 rating3★
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 increased9.1%8.7%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight8.6%5.5%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.2%0.3%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.3%0.7%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms8.5%4.6%6.5%worse
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 injury4.7%2.5%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened10.0%9.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication5.9%14.4%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%99.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.4%4.5%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control13.0%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 table7.2%8.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.6%1.5%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission29.9%26.1%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit6.1%9.1%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.752.131.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.251.151.80better

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.

41.6% 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 62 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

41.6%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.5%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
55.1%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.52U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.20hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.25hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 55.1% 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 0.52 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 83% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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 SNF41.6%CMS range 30.4–50.651.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.5%CMS range 7.7–15.510.7%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 discharge55.1%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 discharge50.0%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 discharge38.5%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge92.5%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 stay2.6%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 worsened5.2%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 hospitalization6.7%CMS range 3.6–12.97.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.201.02Oct 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

0.84
RN hours/ resident / day
0.49
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.06
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.39
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.71
RN hoursweekends
41.7%
Total nursing turnover
42.1%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 116.1 residents a day — about 97% 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 3.39 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.84 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.06 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 3.14 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.50 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.90 to 0.71 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

0
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-03-12)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2024-06-13)

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.

18 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2024-04-05 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect 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 not ensuring staff implemented measures to mitigate the risk and prevent elopement for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for Elopement, of a total sample of 23 residents, (#1). These failures contributed to the elopement of resident #1 and placed her at risk for serious injury, impairment, and/or death. While resident #1 was out of the facility unsupervised, there was likelihood she could have fallen, been accosted by unknown persons, become lost or been hit by a vehicle. On 12/28/2023 at approximately 3:30 PM, resident #1, a vulnerable [AGE] year old female was admitted to the facility from the hospital. While she was at the hospital, doctors determined she was at risk of wandering unsafely without 24-hour supervision, and she required care and services to monitor her and implement measures to ensure freedom from harm and prevent known risks of endangerment. On 12/30/23 at approximately…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-04-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and a secure environment to prevent elopement for 1 of 3 sampled residents reviewed for elopement, of a total sample of 23 residents, (#1). These failures contributed to the elopement of resident #1 and placed her at risk for injury, impairment, or even death. While resident #1 was out of the facility unsupervised, there was high likelihood she could have fallen and sustained serious injury, become lost, been accosted by a stranger, or hit by a car and died. On [DATE] at approximately 3:30 PM, resident #1, a vulnerable [AGE] year-old female was admitted to the facility from the hospital. While at the hospital, she was determined to be at risk of wandering unsafely without 24-hour supervision and required care and services to monitor her to ensure her safety. On [DATE] at 12:05 PM, resident #1 exited the facility's front entrance when the receptionist unlocked the door for her to leave the facility. She walked…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Actual harm · G2024-04-05 · tag F0622 — isolated
    Not transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
    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 an appropriate discharge process to the community was followed for facility-initiated discharges for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for discharge status of a total sample of 23 residents, (#21 and #29). The facility's failure to safely discharge a resident to the community resulted in actual harm. Findings: 1. Review of resident #21's medical record revealed she was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes, right below the knee amputation, absence of left toes, anxiety, anemia, chronic heart failure and mood disorder. She was discharged home on 2/21/24. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) admission assessment with Assessment Reference Date of 1/12/24 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15 out of 15 which indicated intact cognition. The MDS assessment showed resident #21 had impairment on one side in the lower extremity, and used a wheelchair for mobility 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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-03-06 · tag F0624 — isolated
    Prepare residents for a safe transfer or discharge from the nursing home.
    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 physician's ordered discharge medications were timely provided for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for Admission, Transfer, and Discharge, of a total sample of 8 residents, (#7). Findings: Review of the medical record revealed resident #7, a [AGE] year old female was admitted to the facility from a Long Term Care hospital on 8/17/24, and re-admitted after re-hospitalization from an acute care hospital on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included left-side paralysis, altered mental status, muscle weakness, unsteadiness on feet, cerebrovascular (brain vessel) disease, chronic atrial fibrillation (heart rhythm dysfunction), high blood pressure, anxiety disorder, anemia (low blood iron), presence of pacemaker, abnormal coagulation (blood clotting), major depressive disorder, insomnia, Urinary Tract Infection (UTI), Extended Spectrum Beta Lactamase (ESBL) (bacteria in urine) resistance, and resistance to multiple antimicrobial drugs (antibiotics). 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-06 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a laboratory specimen was obtained and submitted per physician's orders for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for Quality of Care, of a total sample of 8 residents, (#7). Findings: Review of the medical record revealed resident #7, a [AGE] year old female was admitted to the facility from a Long Term Care hospital on 8/17/24, and re-admitted after re-hospitalization from an acute care hospital on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included left-side paralysis, altered mental status, muscle weakness, unsteadiness on feet, cerebrovascular (brain vessel) disease, chronic atrial fibrillation (heart rhythm dysfunction), high blood pressure, anxiety disorder, anemia (low blood iron), presence of pacemaker, abnormal coagulation (blood clotting), major depressive disorder, insomnia, Urinary Tract Infection (UTI), Extended Spectrum Beta Lactamase (ESBL) (bacteria in urine) resistance, and resistance to multiple antimicrobial drugs (antibiotics). 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision was provided to prevent elopement for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for elopement, of a total sample of 3 residents, (#1). Review of the medical record revealed resident #1, a [AGE] year old male was admitted to the facility from an acute care hospital on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), psychosis, persistent mood disorders, cognitive impairment, lack of coordination, and difficulty in walking. The most recent Quarterly Minimum Data Set Assessment with an Assessment Reference Date of 7/25/24 noted during the look back periods, resident #1 had impaired vision and he scored 8 out of 15 on the Brief Interview for Mental Status that indicated he was moderately cognitively impaired. The assessment showed there were no behaviors towards himself or others, signs or symptoms of delirium, rejections of evaluations or care, or wandering, and he scored 0 out of 27 on the resident mood…

    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 · D2024-06-13 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a Preadmission Screening And Resident Review (PASARR) for a resident later identified with a Mental Illness (MI), for one of six residents reviewed for PASRR, of a total sample of 40 residents, (#47). Findings: Resident # 47 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and dementia. She had a Level I PASARR completed in the hospital on [DATE] which indicated a Level II PASARR evaluation was not required. Review of the medical record indicated a diagnosis of major depressive disorder was added on 3/16/21 and a diagnosis of schizophrenia was added on 7/27/21. Schizophrenia was listed as a primary diagnosis. The medical record showed the facility failed to repeat a Level I PASARR or refer the resident for Level II evaluation after a new diagnosis for possible MD/ID were added. Review of the Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] Section A indicated no serious mental…

    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 · D2024-06-13 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) was accurately completed prior to accepting a new admission, (#92), failed to request Level I, (#21) and Level II evaluations, (#66), for 3 of 6 residents reviewed for PASARR, of a total sample of 40 residents. Findings: 1. Resident #92's medical record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] from another skilled nurse facility (SNF) with diagnoses including bipolar disorder, depressive disorder, dementia and anxiety. Resident #92's PASARR form dated 1/13/24 was inaccurate and did not reflect that the resident had a serious mental illness (SMI). Review of the psychiatry note dated 2/13/24 included diagnoses of bipolar disorder as well. The resident also had a care plan for behaviors initiated on 2/14/24 and activities of self-care performance deficit which included diagnosis of bipolar disorder on 2/29/24. Further review of the medical record for resident #92 revealed a…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-04-05 · tag F0623 — pattern
    Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the residents or their representatives of a facility-initiated discharge in a timely manner and in writing and failed to submit a copy of the notice to the State Long-Term Care (LTC) Ombudsman for 3 of 3 residents reviewed for discharge status out of a total sample of 23 residents, (#21, #28 and #29). Findings: 1. Resident #21 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes, right below the knee amputation, absence of left toes, anxiety, anemia, chronic heart failure and mood disorder. She was discharged home on 2/21/24. On 4/04/24 at 7:28 AM, resident #21 stated she was verbally informed she would be discharged the day before she went home. She indicated she asked the facility how to appeal her insurance's decision for discharge and was told it only applied to Medicare patients. She asked for the Ombudsman's information but did not receive it and was told if she wanted to stay it would cost her about $371.00 a…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-04-05 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — pattern
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure implementation of policies to include thorough monitoring of previously identified areas of concern and adequately track performance to ensure prior improvement measures for discharge notifications were realized and sustained. Findings: Cross reference F623 Review of the facility's policy, Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) revised 10/24/22 read, The center will monitor department performance systems to identify issues or adverse events. Center will review department system data. If a quality deficiency is identified, the committee will oversee the development of corrective action(s). The facility was cited at F623, Notice Requirements Before Transfer/Discharge , §483.15(c)(3) (6)(8), Code of Federal Regulations, during the last complaint survey conducted 6/07/23. Review of the Plan of Correction (POC) which served as the facility's allegation of compliance with the alleged citations, approved by the QAPI committee on 7/06/23 read, SSD (Social Services Director) was re-educated by the regional…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-04-05 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to obtain written authorization to manage personal funds for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for personal funds, of a total sample of 23 residents, (#23). Findings: Review of resident #23's medical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included history of falls, pathological fracture of right humerus, osteoporosis, and muscle weakness. Resident #23 was discharged from the facility on 1/16/23. Review of the Minimum Data Set admission Assessment with Assessment Reference Date of 12/13/22 revealed resident #23 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 13 which indicated she was cognitively intact. Resident #23's medical record revealed she made all decisions for her care. On 4/02/24 at 8:23 AM, during a telephone interview, resident #23 explained she lived at the facility for a couple of months and received therapy services. She indicated months after she was discharged , the facility in error received her alimony…

    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 · E2022-09-02 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — pattern
    Provide 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 14. Resident #59's medical record revealed the resident was admitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included encephalopathy, muscle weakness, other lack of coordination, unsteadiness on feet, difficulty in walking, psychosis, delusional disorders and unspecified mood disorder. Her admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed she had severe cognitive impairment. She required limited assistance of one staff for bed mobility, dressing, eating and personal hygiene; she also required supervision for transfer. Resident #59 used a walker or wheelchair for mobility. Record review revealed that on 08/29/22, resident #59 had orders to discontinue PT services after 08/29/22 treatment. The Therapy Communication to Restorative Nursing Program form dated 08/29/22 indicated resident #59 had weakness on bilateral lower extremities and decrease in standing balance. The recommendations read, walk the patient outside her room/in the hallway for 100 feet using a cane . The form was signed by Physical Therapist Q and by an RNP CNA 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2022-09-02 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — pattern
    Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure adequate nurse staffing to meet the needs of residents who required splinting and range of motion services through the Restorative Nursing Program (RNP) for 19 of 19 residents reviewed who were referred to the RNP of a total sample of 57 residents (#78, 97, 25, 62, 52, 69, 17, 83, 59, 21, 11, 18, 85, 23, 43, 19, 34, 93 & 7). Findings: Cross reference F688 and F835. Review of the Facility Assessment with most recent revision date 3/28/22 indicated Restorative Nursing and Contracture Care as part of the needed service and care provided by the facility to its residents. The document indicated the majority of the facility's residents were geriatric and required assistance from one or two staff for activities of daily living (ADLs). The assessment revealed staffing was a function of census and acuity and assignments would be made with respect to hours required to sufficiently meet the care needs of the residents on all shifts. On 9/02/22 at 11:39 AM, Physical Therapist (PT) R stated she held a Doctorate…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 5 citations
  • Potential for harm · E2022-09-02 · tag F0835 — failed to run the facility competently — pattern
    Administer the facility in a manner that enables it to use its resources effectively and efficiently.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to utilize its resources effectively to adequately provide staff for the Restorative Nursing Program (RNP) to ensure residents received needed therapy services. Findings: Cross reference F688 and F725. On 09/01/22 at 09:43 AM, Restorative Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) P acknowledged the RNP was not done. He also stated there used to be three Restorative CNAs but then she resigned and now they were down to two. Restorative CNA P confirmed he had a stack of referrals in his cabinet as far as a year ago which were not done. He added he continued to receive new referrals but nobody could determine who needed to be removed from the program. He admitted he could not perform all the tasks as expected. He stated he was overwhelmed. On 9/01/22 at 1:16 PM, the Staffing Coordinator (SC) confirmed she staffed according to the facility census. She stated she attempted to staff one or two CNAs over the usual number, but sometimes sataff called off. She explained she tried to replace the open position but may have to pull another…

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

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-09-02 · tag F0571 — isolated
    Limit the charges against residents' personal funds for items or services for which payment is made under Medicare or Medicaid.
    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 obtain a written authorization for disbursements from the resident trust account for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for personal funds out of a total sample of 57 residents (#54). Findings: Resident #54's medical record revealed she was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted from an acute care hospital on 2/06/22. Her diagnoses included heart failure, type 2 diabetes, history of COVID-19, chronic kidney disease and dependence on renal dialysis. Review of the Minimum Data Set Quarterly Assessment with Assessment Reference Date of 7/05/22 revealed resident #54 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15 which indicated she was cognitively intact. Resident #54's medical record revealed she made all the decisions for her care. On 8/29/22 at 12:12 PM, resident #54 stated she learned from other residents they received $130.00 every month but that was not her case. Resident #54 explained she spoke with someone at the business office…

    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 · D2022-09-02 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs) related to nail care for 1 of 2 dependent residents reviewed for ADLs out of a total sample of 57 residents (#43). Findings: Resident #43 medical record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including brain bleed, speech/language disorder from stroke, seizures, and paralysis to the right/dominant side of his body. The Minimum Date Set (MDS) Quarterly Assessment, dated 6/29/22, revealed he had severely impaired cognition and indicated he did not reject evaluation or care necessary to achieve the resident's goals for health and well-being. The assessment indicated resident #43 required extensive assistance from one staff for bed mobility, transfers, dressing and for personal hygiene. The document showed resident #43 had functional impairment in both his upper and lower extremities on one side of his body that interfered with daily function or…

    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 · Dcited before2022-09-02 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to follow the physician's order for wound treatment for 1 of 2 sampled residents reviewed for skin condition out of a total sample of 57 residents (#50). Findings: Resident #50's medical record revealed the resident was initially admitted on [DATE], then readmitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included atrial fibrillation, history of falling, primary open-angle glaucoma, macular degeneration and unsteadiness on feet. Her most recent quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date of 06/26/22 revealed she had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, indicating her cognition was intact. She required supervision for bed mobility and transfers, supervision with one staff physical assistance for toilet use and personal hygiene and used a manual wheelchair for mobility. Review of physician's orders, dated 08/24/22, read, Clean wound with normal saline, pat dry, then apply steri-strips, leave it open to air. It did not…

    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 · D2022-09-02 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide 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 a resident received supplemental oxygen as ordered for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for respiratory care out of 57 total sampled residents (#29). Findings: Resident #29's medical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted from an acute care hospital on 5/19/22. Her diagnoses included obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), cardiomyopathy, and type 2 diabetes. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) quarterly assessment with Assessment Reference Date of 6/15/22 revealed resident #29 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 15 which indicated she was cognitively intact. The MDS revealed resident #29 used oxygen therapy in the previous 14 days. The quarterly assessment noted no rejection of care necessary to obtain goals for her health and well-being. The medical record revealed a physician's order dated 7/14/22 for Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) at night and as needed (PRN) as tolerated with 2 liters per…

    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

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

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

Fines & penalties

$21,693 in federal fines across 5 penalties.

  • $5,125 — penalty dated 2024-04-05
  • $5,125 — penalty dated 2024-04-05
  • $6,550 — penalty dated 2024-04-05
  • $1,748 — penalty dated 2023-11-06
  • $3,145 — penalty dated 2023-10-17

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 AVIATA HEALTH GROUP — 50 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 52.4+1.6 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.0+2.0 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.7+0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.1≈ chain avg
The other 49 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.4★, per CMS)
1 of 5Aspire At EvansFort Myers, FL 1 of 5Aviata At BenevaSarasota, FL 1 of 5Aviata At Big BendPerry, FL 1 of 5Aviata At Bryan DairyLargo, FL 1 of 5Aviata At FletcherTampa, FL 1 of 5Aviata At Palma Sola BayBradenton, FL 1 of 5Aviata At Saint LucieFort Pierce, FL 1 of 5Aviata At SarasotaSarasota, FL 1 of 5Aviata At SeminoleSeminole, FL 1 of 5Aviata At The BayTampa, FL 1 of 5Aviata At The PalmsPalm Harbor, FL 1 of 5Aviata At VeniceVenice, FL 2 of 5Aviata At Arbor SpringsOcala, FL 2 of 5Aviata At BradentonBradenton, FL 2 of 5Aviata At BrentwoodLecanto, FL 2 of 5Aviata At Colonial LakesWinter Garden, FL 2 of 5Aviata At EnglewoodEnglewood, FL 2 of 5Aviata At Grand OaksPalm Coast, FL 2 of 5Aviata At Green Cove SpringsGreen Cove Springs, FL 2 of 5Aviata At GreenacresGreen Acres, FL 2 of 5Aviata At Lakeside OaksDunedin, FL 2 of 5Aviata At OakfieldBrandon, FL 2 of 5Aviata At Santa BarbaraCape Coral, FL 2 of 5Aviata At South DaytonaSouth Daytona, FL 2 of 5Aviata At TallahasseeTallahassee, FL 2 of 5Aviata At The HarborSafety Harbor, FL 2 of 5Aviata At The Sea - PasadenaSouth Pasadena, FL 2 of 5Aviata At The Sea - Pompano BeachPompano Beach, FL 2 of 5Aviata At West Palm BeachWest Palm Beach, FL 2 of 5Aviata at Sand KeyClearwater, FL 3 of 5Aspire At Ridge HavenNew Port Richey, FL 3 of 5Aviata At BrooksvilleBrooksville, FL 3 of 5Aviata At Central ParkBrandon, FL 3 of 5Aviata At Coral BayWest Palm Beach, FL 3 of 5Aviata At CountrysidePalm Harbor, FL 3 of 5Aviata At JacksonvilleJacksonville, FL 3 of 5Aviata At North Fort MyersN Ft Myers, FL 3 of 5Aviata At RosewoodOrlando, FL 3 of 5Aviata At San JoseJacksonville, FL 3 of 5Aviata At St CloudSaint Cloud, FL

Showing 40 of 49; 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
5405 BABCOCK ST NE OPCO PARENT LLCOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 12/01/2023
5405 BABCOCK ST NE OPCO HOLDCO LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 12/01/2023
FREUND, NOCHUMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/01/2023
BENFIELD, MALORYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/04/2024
FARIS, TONYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/01/2024
DAGAN, AMITAIIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
GOLDBERGER, ABRAHAMIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
GOLDBERGER, FAIGYIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
HERSKOWITZ, ELIEZERIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
HERSKOWITZ, YAAKOVIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
TRAVITSKY, AARONIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
ASPIRE MGT LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2023

CMS files one row per role, so the 15 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

3 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$4.7M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-13.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$255K
Related-party expense5% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 60%Medicare 14%Other / private 26%

This home reported $255K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

$332per resident / day
operating cost
$10,080per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$292per 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 105985. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-12, 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.

What to do next