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

Community Health And Rehabilitation Center

3611 Transmitter Road, Panama City, FL 32404 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 120 certified beds · (850) 588-4643 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (850) 588-4643 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 11 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record

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 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
3109 Minnesota Avenue, Suite 101
Pharmacy
1833 N East Ave · (850) 785-2480 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
3621 US 231 North · (850) 914-2333 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 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 held steady at 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased8.0%8.7%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight9.1%5.5%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.9%0.3%0.9%typical
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%0.7%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.0%4.6%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury6.1%2.5%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened6.7%9.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication7.2%14.4%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%99.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.6%4.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control5.8%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 table6.8%8.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.6%94.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission30.6%26.1%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit17.1%9.1%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.992.131.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.901.151.80worse

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.

52.8% 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 338 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

52.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
12.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
33.3%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.64U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.30hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.21hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.13hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 33.3% 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 132 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 0.64 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 90% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 SNF52.8%CMS range 47.4–57.551.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF12.3%CMS range 9.9–15.010.7%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 discharge33.3%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 discharge36.4%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 discharge20.4%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 setting97.8%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge98.8%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 stay1.4%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened1.4%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.8%CMS range 5.4–10.97.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.051.02Oct 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

0.43
RN hours/ resident / day
1.10
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.18
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.72
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.35
RN hoursweekends
43.6%
Total nursing turnover
66.7%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 97.0 residents a day — about 81% occupied, or roughly 23 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.72 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.43 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.18 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 3.52 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.80 on weekdays — 7% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.46 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 44% 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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-08-28)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2024-06-06)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based upon observations, the facility failed to ensure residents had a clean and sanitary environment as evidenced by residents' personal items not labeled and stored appropriately for each resident in 5 out of 9 rooms sampled.The findings include:An observation was made on the north hallway of Unit 2 on 8/25/25 at 11:00 AM. The following issues were observed:In room [ROOM NUMBER], personal items were not labeled and not separated for each resident residing in the room. In room [ROOM NUMBER], a bedpan was sitting in the bathroom in between the handrail and wall and was not bagged.In room [ROOM NUMBER], a resident's urinal was hanging on the garbage can next to the bed out of the resident's reach.In room [ROOM NUMBER], a bedpan was observed in the bathroom sitting between the handrail and the wall.A second observation was made on this hall on 8/25/25 at 3:00 pm. The following issues were observed.In room [ROOM NUMBER], the personal items sitting in the resident's bathroom was still not labeled or separated for…

    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 before2025-08-28 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, record reviews, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure the provision of care in accordance with professional standards by not ensuring that wound care was provided as stated in the physician order in a timely manner and failed to assess and document a newly identified skin impairment for 2 of 2 residents sampled for non-pressure related skin impairments. (Resident #9 and #106)The findings include: Resident #106 On 8/25/25 at approximately 12:00 PM, an interview and observation was conducted with Resident #106. A Negative Pressure Wound Device (wound vac) was sitting on the bed with the hose not connected to Resident #106. The resident stated it was removed by the nurse at approximately 6:00 AM on 08/25/25 due to becoming loose from the dressing to the lower back surgical wound. A gauze with tape was noted on the lower back with no date present. A Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) was in place to the inner right upper arm with the date of 8/14 written on the dressing. On 8/25/25 at approximately 2:05 PM, an observation of…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain sanitary food practices and ensure kitchen staff wore required hair covering while preparing resident meals. The findings include:On 08/25/2025 at approximately 10:30AM, during kitchen tour with Food Service Director observed staff K cooking lunch without a hair net. Food Service Director asked staff if staff K was wearing a hair net. Staff K stated, No, I am not wearing one. During the same tour at approximately 10:55AM observed in the vegetable freeze a 16 oz Pepsi on the top shelf. Interviewed Food Service Director confirming the drink belong to a staff member. On 8/28/25 at approximately 9:33AM observed staff J cooking meal without facial covering for beard and mustache. Food Service Director informed staff J to put facial covering on. After reviewing emergency food, staff J was still without facial covering. Food Service Director informed staff J to leave the area to put facial covering on.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0914 — isolated
    Provide bedrooms that don't allow residents to see each other when privacy is needed.
    What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure each resident bedroom was equipped to provide full visual privacy for 1 of 19 sampled resident bedrooms. (room [ROOM NUMBER])An observation of room [ROOM NUMBER]A was conducted on 8/26/25 at 2:09 PM. The room was occupied by a resident. The privacy curtain was observed to be about 3 feet too short in width to provide full visual privacy of the resident. In addition, the existing curtain was stuck and would not pull in the curtain track. Another observation of room [ROOM NUMBER]A was conducted on 8/27/25 at 10:07 AM with the Housekeeping Supervisor. She observed the curtain and stated the track was coming loose from the ceiling and confirmed the curtain was too short in length to provide full visual privacy. (Photographic evidence was obtained.) She stated she had a list of rooms regarding privacy curtain issues that was created on 8/26/25 and room [ROOM NUMBER] was included on the list.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-06 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, staff interview, resident interview, and records review, the facility failed to ensure the interdisciplinary team assessed and determined residents were capable of self-administration of medications prior to allowing 2 of 4 residents sampled for medication administration to self-administer medications. (Residents #32 and #61) The findings include: During the observation of medication administration on 06/04/2024 at 9:13 AM with Registered Nurse (RN) I, it was observed that oral medications, including a schedule II medication, Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen Tablet 5-325 milligrams (mg) (a medication used for pain), were placed in a medicine cup and left at the bedside for Resident #61 to self-administer. Following this observation, an interview was completed with RN I. She said that Resident #61 was not assessed for self-administration. An observation on 6/4/2024 at about 9:20 AM found Resident #32 with 8 pills loose on the breakfast tray in front of him/her. (photographic evidence obtained) During a follow up interview on 6/4/24 at about 9:30 AM with RN I, 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 · Dcited before2024-06-06 · 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

    Based on observation, resident interview, staff interview, record review and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that wound assessments, dressing changes and wound care were provided in accordance with physician orders and facility policy for 2 of 3 residents sampled for wound care observations (Resident #7 & #24). The findings include: Resident #24: On 6/3/24 at approximately 11:46 AM, an interview and observation was conducted with Resident #24. The surveyor entered the room as the resident repeatedly said, help me, help me. The resident indicated she wanted to get up. The resident showed the surveyor her left leg. She indicated that her leg was bothering her. Resident #24 had a small, round, uncovered open area lateral to her left knee. Her left lower leg had a dressing. The dressing was dated 5/30 (4 days ago). The dressing had visible dried brown drainage present. (photographic evidence obtained) On 6/4/24 a review of Resident #24's record was conducted. A review of the progress notes and hospital discharge summary from 5/29/24 for Resident #24 revealed that 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 · D2024-06-06 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow physician orders for tube feeding formula for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for tube feeding. (Resident #26) The findings include: During a tour of the facility conducted on 06/03/24 at 11:45 AM, Resident #26 was observed lying in her bed with tube feeding hanging but not infusing. The bottle of tube feeding formula that was observed was Jevity 1.5 (photographic evidence obtained). A second observation was conducted on 06/03/24 at 2:30 PM of Resident #26's tube feeding infusing-the bottle infusing was Jevity 1.5 formula. Initial review of Resident #26's record revealed the tube feeding order written by the physician on 09/24/23 was for Jevity 1.2 formula. This indicates Resident #26 was receiving the wrong tube feeding formula. Resident #26 was last readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #26's medical history revealed she has a history of Cancer, Difficulty Swallowing, and Gastrostomy Tube Dependency. An interview was…

    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 · D2024-06-06 · 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

    Based on observations, record reviews, interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to obtain physician orders to administer oxygen for 1 of 4 residents sampled for respiratory care. (Resident #15) The findings include: On 6/3/24 at 12:04 PM, 6/4/24 at 12:48 PM and 3:16 PM, and 6/5/24 at 8:45 AM, Resident #15 was observed in bed receiving humidified oxygen via nasal cannula at 1.5 liters (L) from an oxygen concentrator. On 6/5/24 at 11:17 AM, Resident #15 was observed sitting up in a wheelchair in the hall near their room receiving oxygen via nasal cannula at 2 L from portable oxygen tank. On 6/3/24, a record review was conducted for Resident #15. The record review included a review of the current and discontinued/completed physician orders. There were no orders for oxygen therapy. On 6/5/24 at 8:46 AM, an interview was conducted with Resident #15, who stated they have been using oxygen for 2 to 3 weeks prior to admission to the facility and has been on oxygen continuously since admission to the facility. On 6/5/24 at 10:23 AM, an interview was conducted with Staff H, 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-06 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain proper infection control protocol for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for transmission based precautions. (Resident #44) The findings included: During a tour of the facility conducted on 06/03/24 at 11:45 AM, Resident #44's room door had an isolation sign for Enhanced Barrier Precautions. An initial review of Resident #44's record revealed a physician's order written on 06/02/24 for Contact Isolation. Further review of Resident #44's record revealed this Contact Isolation order was written due to Resident #44 having an Extended Spectrum Beta-Lactamase (ESBL) infection in her urine requiring the use of Macrobid (an oral antibiotic) from 05/26/24 to 06/09/24. Resident #44 was last readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. A review of Resident #44's medical history revealed she had a history of Chronic Kidney Disease, Urinary Tract Infections, and Dementia. Continued observations were conducted on 06/04/24 and 06/05/24 revealed the Enhanced…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-08-31 · 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 record review, staff interviews, and resident interview the facility failed to ensure sufficient nurse staffing on all shifts resulting in 5 of 5 sampled residents not receiving physician ordered medications on the morning of 8/26/23. (Residents #1,# 2, #3, #4, and #5) The findings include: Review of the staff assignment sheet for 11:00 PM-7:00 AM shift beginning on 8/25/23 and ending on 8/26/23 revealed the south unit had only one nurse for the shift (Employee A, who is a licensed practical nurse (LPN)). The other nurse that was scheduled did not report to work for the assigned shift. An interview was conducted with the Administrator on 8/31/23 at 10:53 AM. The Administrator stated that, on the 8/25/23 11:00 PM-7:00 AM shift, the facility had 3 nurses scheduled to work, but one nurse was absent. The Director of Nursing (DON) nor himself were notified the nurse did not report for work until about 3:00 AM on 8/26/23. They attempted to find a nurse to come in but were not successful. He stated the DON had worked from 7 AM - 11 PM on 8/25/23 and had worked as on the floor for…

    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
  • Potential for harm · E2023-03-16 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — pattern
    Provide 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

    Based on interviews, record reviews and policy reviews, the facility failed to ensure accurate accounting of controlled substances for 3 of 7 residents sampled (Residents #20, #57, and #155). The findings include: A review was conducted of the controlled drug declining inventory sheets and the electronic medication administration record. The following discrepancies were identified: Resident # 155 Diazepam (anxiety) 2 mg (milligrams) - 6 tablets were marked as on hand on 3/9/23 on the Controlled Drug Declining Inventory Sheet. Further review of the sheet revealed that one tablet of diazepam was administered on 3/9/23 at 8:30 AM, 3:00 PM, and 9:00 PM, 3/10/23 at 3:00 AM, 1:30 PM, and 11:00 PM, equaling 6 tablets with zero tablets remaining. However, review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for March 2023 revealed the medication was documented as administered 4 times (3/9/23 at 8:21 AM and 2:56 PM and 3/10/23 at 11:10 AM and 11:11 PM) indicating that there should be 2 tablets remaining and not zero as documented on the controlled drug inventory sheet. There were 2 tablets…

    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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
QUALITY CARE PROPERTIES LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST50%since 01/01/2014
CLEVELAND, JEFFREYIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL10%since 03/01/2021
FRASER, GEOFFREYIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL10%since 03/01/2021
GALLAGHER, DUANEIndividual5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL30%since 03/01/2021
MCELHENEY, RANDALLIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST50%since 03/01/2021
MARTIN, MARIANNEIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 01/01/2014
CLEAR CHOICE HEALTH CARE LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2021
KENNEDY, DEBORAHIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/01/2021

CMS files one row per role, so the 11 rows in the source record cover these 8 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$12.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+3.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$333K
Related-party expense3% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 50%Medicare 29%Other / private 22%

This home reported $333K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

$361per resident / day
operating cost
$10,984per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$376per 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 105975. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-28, 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