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

Aviata At University Hills

10040 Hillview Road, Pensacola, FL 32514 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 120 certified beds · (850) 474-0570 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (850) 474-0570 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
$28,359 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • the CMS record shows $28,359 in federal fines (most recent 2023-12-11)
  • nursing-staff turnover (62%) runs well above the national median (45%)

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
2201 E Nine Mile Rd · (850) 479-6250 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Walgreens0.7 mi
1909 E Nine Mile Rd · (850) 471-9065 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Publix0.9 mi
9251 University Pkwy · (850) 473-5000 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Place of worship
2480 E Nine Mile Rd · (850) 805-5888

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 1 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

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 increased5.9%8.7%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.8%5.5%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.3%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%0.7%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms7.4%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 injury2.5%2.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened5.0%9.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication10.5%14.4%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%99.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.5%4.5%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control6.3%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 table5.0%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 vaccine98.7%94.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission26.9%26.1%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit12.8%9.1%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.852.131.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.001.151.80better

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.

32.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 40 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

32.4%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
61.4%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.21U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.09hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.10hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 61.4% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 57 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 0.21 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 24% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

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

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF32.4%CMS range 23.6–47.151.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.8%CMS range 8.3–18.710.7%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 discharge61.4%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge61.4%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 discharge47.4%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 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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened4.9%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 hospitalization8.2%CMS range 5.1–13.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.021.02Oct 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

0.70
RN hours/ resident / day
0.56
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.00
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.26
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.63
RN hoursweekends
62.4%
Total nursing turnover
47.4%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 108.3 residents a day — about 90% occupied, or roughly 12 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.26 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.70 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.00 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 3.06 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.34 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.73 to 0.63 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 62% is well above the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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 (2026-01-29)
7
at the previous standard inspection (2024-09-19)

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 · Ecited before2025-12-02 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — pattern
    Make sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain resident call lights in 8 out of 67 rooms. (Rooms 101, 127, 151, 201, 204, 209, 231, and 252)The findings include: On 12/1/2025, a walkthrough of the building was performed with the Maintenance Director. Every resident's room was checked for functioning call lights in the beds and bathrooms. During the walkthrough, rooms 204A and B, 209A and B, 201A and B, 231A and B, 252A and B, 151A and B, 127A, and 101A and B were observed with nonfunctioning call lights.On 12/1/2025 at 10:30 am, Resident # 3 was interviewed. She stated she needs to have a bell at the bedside to make sure she can call the nurses but stated she cannot because the call light sometimes does not work.On 12/1/2025 at 10:40 am, Resident #1 was interviewed. She explained that, for a long time, her call light was not working, and the nurses gave her a bell to call for assistance. She stated the nursing aides appear irritated when she uses the bell and ask her why…

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

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-09-19 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    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 on observations, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to provide housekeeping and maintenance services neccessary to maintain a sanitary and orderly interior for 11 of 32 sampled rooms and 2 common areas observed. (Rooms 106, 110, 123, 129, 131, 208, 226, 227, 228, 232, 234, the unit one hallway, and the locked unit day room) The findings include: During a tour of the locked memory care unit with the Administrator and Employee B (Regional Maintenance Director) on 9/18/24 at 3:58 PM, the following was observed: room [ROOM NUMBER]B had blinds in disrepair. room [ROOM NUMBER] had a dark stain on the bathroom floor and an unlabeled wash basin on the back of the toilet. room [ROOM NUMBER] had two fire dampers bulging from the ceiling tile near the door. room [ROOM NUMBER] had one door that was missing from the armoire. room [ROOM NUMBER] had no curtains or blinds on the window and had a partially patched hole in the wall. The locked unit day room had a cove base missing from the wall near 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 before2024-09-19 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    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 interviews, observations, and record reviews the facility failed to implement the care plan to meet the nursing and physical needs to maintain the highest functional well-beingfor 1 of 22 residents reviewed for care plans. (Resident #95) The findings include: On 09/16/24 at approximately 01:30 PM Resident #95 was observed attempting to feed herself with her family present. Despite repeated attempts, she was unsuccessful using silverware and used her hands to feed herself, dropping much of the food in the process. On 09/17/24 at 12:36 PM, the resident was observed laying in bed with a bedside tray table positioned next to the bed with a lunch tray positioned on it with tray positioned at chin level. Resident #95 was observed having difficulty feeding herself. Resident #95's milk was not opened and Resident #95 was observed unsuccessfully attempting to open it. Resident #95 was observed with food debris down the front of her clothing and on her chin where she attempted to feed herself. On 09/18/24 at…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    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

    Based on observations, interviews, and review of the electronic medical records (EMR), the facility failed to provide necessary range of motion services for 1 of 4 residents sampled for range of motion. (Resident #68) The findings include: A review of Resident #68's medical record revealed an order dated 4/03/2024 stating Resident up to wheelchair every meal, every shift. Further review of the EMR revealed that staff had signed off on Resident #68 being up in her wheelchair for meals on 9/16/2024, 9/17/2024 (evening and night shift), 9/18/2024 and 9/19/2024 (day shift). However, on four separate observations on 09/16/24 at approximately 11:56 AM and 03:10 PM and on 09/17/2024 at approximately 08:35 AM and 03:59 PM, Resident #68 was observed to be in her bed. On 09/17/24 at approximately 12:45 PM, Resident #68 was observed semi-reclined in bed, leaning to the right side. The lunch tray was delivered by Staff Member P, a certified nursing assistant (CNA), who proceeded to reposition the resident and began to feed resident #68 her lunch. An interview was conducted with Staff Member P,…

    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 · D2024-09-19 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on staff interviews, record review, and the facilities' policy and procedures, the facility failed to maintain ongoing communication and collaboration with the dialysis center regarding dialysis care and services for 1 of 1 residents reviewed for dialysis care. (Resident #43) The findings include: A review of Resident #43's dialysis communication binder on 9/19/2024 revealed the last dialysis communication form was completed on 8/9/2024, even though Resident #43 had been receiving dialysis care from an outside facility every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. On 09/18/24 at approximately 11:47 AM, the director of nursing (DON) indicated the residents have their own dialysis binders that are used to communicate with the dialysis center which should be kept at the nurses' station. The unit managers check the dialysis binders weekly to ensure the dialysis communication sheets are being completed. A concurrent interview with Staff C, unit manager, confirmed she did not follow up on these. On 09/18/24 at approximately 02:23 PM, during a follow-up interview with the DON, she stated that…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based upon record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide scheduled medications for 1 of 20 residents reviewed for medication administration. (Resident #43) The findings include: A review of the medication administration record (MAR) for September 2024 revealed Resident #43 has not been receiving the following medications at 9:00 AM and 1:00 PM on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, as he is out of the facility at dialysis during those times, resulting in multiple missed doses: 1. Prostat (a protein supplement to aide in wound healing) 2. Vit D-Cholecalciferol Oral Capsule 50 MCG (2000 UT) Give 1 capsule by mouth one time a day for supplement 3. Ciclopirox External Solution 8 % (Ciclopirox) Apply to fingernails topically one time a day (to treat fungal infection of the nail bed) 4. Clopidogrel Bisulfate Oral Tablet 75 MG (Clopidogrel Bisulfate) Give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day (an antiplatelet drug to prevent blood clots) 5. Clotrimazole Mouth/Throat Troche 10 MG (Clotrimazole) Give 1 lozenge by…

    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
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, staff interviews, review of the electronic medical record (EMR), and review of the facility policies and procedures, the facility failed to provide safe and secure storage of medications for 1 of 1 residents. (Resident #108) The findings include: On 9/16/24 at approximately 11:45 am, Resident #108 was observed with a Spiriva inhaler (a medication used to prevent wheezing and shortness of breath) positioned at bed side. Resident #108 indicated that the inhaler at bedside was empty; however, another inhaler was visibly stored in a nearby open drawer. On 9/17/24 at approximately 10:00 am, during an interview with Resident #108, he stated the Spiriva inhaler still remains in his drawer. A follow up observation at 2:35 pm verified the Spiriva inhaler was still in an open nightstand drawer. On 9/18/24 at approximately 11:30 am, during an interview with Staff C, a licensed practical nurse (LPN), she stated that the inhaler should not be there. LPN C indicated that she was unaware the Spiriva inhaler was in the resident's possession. On 9/18/24 at approximately 12:00…

    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
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-19 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolated
    Make sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the Resident Call lights were functional to allow residents to call for staff assistance for 1 of 32 rooms observed. (rooms [ROOM NUMBERS]) The findings include: room [ROOM NUMBER]: An observation of room [ROOM NUMBER] was conducted on 9/16/24 at 1:31 PM. The resident call system in the bathroom was not functional. A follow up observation of room [ROOM NUMBER] was conducted on 9/18/24 at 8:41 AM and the call system in the bathroom was still not functional. Employee L (Certified Nursing Assistant) confirmed the call system was not functioning. She stated the resident occupying the room toileted independently. Review of the facility policy for Communication Systems, Maintenance Inspection Testing and Safety (effective 11/30/14) revealed, .communication systems and components will be properly maintained to function reliably and ensure operator safety. In the event of systems or component failure the system operators will notify maintenance…

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

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-06-15 · 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 obtain a Level II screening for 3 of 6 residents reviewed for Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR). (Residents #25, #37, and #96) The findings include: Resident #96 A review of the PASARR form for Resident #96 (admitted on [DATE]) noted an identified diagnosis of Anxiety Disorder and a diagnosis of dementia. Per the PASARR form, the combination of a Serious Mental Disorder (SMI) diagnosis and Dementia or neurocognitive disorder would trigger the requirement for a Level II review. A review of the admission Diagnosis in the medical record noted a diagnosis of Major Depressive Disorder and Unspecified Dementia, Unspecified Severity with Psychotic Disturbance. A review of the Care Plan for Resident #96 noted that the resident was care planned for antipsychotic therapy for diagnosis of dementia with psychotic features, auditory and visual hallucinations, and antidepressant usage. A review of the physician's progress note dated 6/13/2023 noted…

    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 · Dcited before2023-06-15 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to implement the care plan for behavior monitoring for psychotropic medications for 1 of 5 residents sampled for unnecessary medication review. (Resident #86) The findings include: A record review was conducted of Resident #86's medical record, which revealed an order for Clonazepam 0.5mg (a medication used to treat anxiety). Further review of the medical record revealed a care plan dated 4/23/23 for monitoring of behavioral symptoms and side effects related to anti-anxiety medication. Review of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed no monitoring for behaviors. On 6/13/23 at approximately 3:26 PM, an interview was conducted with Nurse D, a Registered Nurse (RN), concerning behavior monitoring for resident #86. Nurse D stated that the behavior monitoring is normally located on the MAR, but confirmed there was no behavior monitoring for Resident #86. On 6/13/23 at approximately 3:28 PM, an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON) concerning behavior monitoring for residents on…

    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 · D2023-06-15 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — isolated
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to provide dietary services to meet the needs for 1 of 1 resident selected for food services. (Resident #22) The findings include: On 6/12/23 at approximately 8:30 AM, an observation was conducted of Resident #22's breakfast tray, which revealed one slice of French toast, 2 slices of bacon, a bowl of grits, 4 oz of apple juice, and a carton of milk. However, the accompanying dietary slip revealed the resident's diet to be regular, no added salt, with large portions. A further review of the dietary slip indicated the resident should have received 3 slices of French toast, 2 sausage patties, 6 oz of hot cereal, 4 oz of orange juice, and 8 oz of milk. On 6/14/23 at approximately 12:47 PM, an observation was made of Resident #22's lunch tray which revealed a ham sandwich, 1 scoop of potato salad, 1 plate of lettuce and tomato, and a glass of tea. A review of Resident #22's dietary slip indicated the resident should have received 1.5 ham sandwiches, 2/3 cup of potato salad, lettuce and tomato plate, and 1.5 cups…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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

$28,359 in federal fines across 3 penalties.

  • $13,635 — penalty dated 2023-12-11
  • $4,235 — penalty dated 2023-11-20
  • $10,489 — penalty dated 2023-10-30

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
HILLVIEW PARENT LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 11/02/2023
HILLVIEW HOLDCO LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 11/02/2023
FREUND, NOCHUMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 11/02/2023
NORMAN, MICHAELIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2024
WILSON, JAMESIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/07/2025
DAGAN, AMITAIIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/27/2025
GOLDBERGER, ABRAHAMIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/27/2025
GOLDBERGER, FAIGYIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/27/2025
HERSKOWITZ, ELIEZERIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/27/2025
HERSKOWITZ, YAAKOVIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/27/2025
TRAVITSKY, AARONIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/27/2025
ASPIRE MGT LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 11/02/2023

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.

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.

$3.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-26.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$184K
Related-party expense4% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 84%Medicare 5%Other / private 11%

About 84% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $184K 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

$301per resident / day
operating cost
$9,158per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$238per 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 105445. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-29, 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