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

Solaris Healthcare Plant City

701 N Wilder Rd, Plant City, FL 33566 · Non profit - Corporation · 180 certified beds · (813) 752-3611 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (813) 752-3611 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 7 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 (5/5) — 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
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
Worth asking about
  • its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions

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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 5 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 4 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
508 N Maryland Ave · (813) 349-7600 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Grocery
617 N Maryland Ave · (813) 752-1548 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1748 E Sansone Blvd · (813) 659-4255 · 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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 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 4 to 5 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 rating5★
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 increased5.5%8.7%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight0.8%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 infection0.2%0.7%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms2.1%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 injury3.0%2.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened6.8%9.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication10.8%14.4%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%99.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.3%4.5%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control5.0%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 table6.9%8.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.6%1.5%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%94.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission27.3%26.1%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit9.1%9.1%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.662.131.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.041.151.80better

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.

49.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 325 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

49.1%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
58.3%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.37U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.16hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.14hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 58.3% 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 247 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 0.37 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 63% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 33% 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 SNF49.1%CMS range 44.3–54.151.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.8%CMS range 9.1–14.210.7%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 discharge58.3%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 discharge60.3%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge46.6%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified99.4%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 setting98.6%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 discharge96.3%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.9%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 hospitalization8.0%CMS range 5.8–11.27.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.301.02Oct 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

0.42
RN hours/ resident / day
1.05
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.41
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.88
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.33
RN hoursweekends
42.5%
Total nursing turnover
35.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 180 beds and averages 172.5 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.88 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.42 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.41 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 3.48 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.05 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.46 to 0.33 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 42% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-02-29)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2021-11-18)

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

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.

  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-29 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure one (Resident #165) of three residents reviewed for hospitalization was coded correctly on the minimum data set (MDS) at discharge. Findings included: A review of Resident #165's Face Sheet revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses included but not limited to Unspecified dementia, unspecified severity, with psychotic disturbance, muscle weakness (generalized), Unspecified lack of coordination, chronic kidney disease, stage 3b, bipolar disorder, unspecified, Major depressive disorder, recurrent, moderate and generalized anxiety disorder. A review of the Discharge - Return Not Anticipated Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed under Section A- Identification Information A. 2105 Discharge Status Resident #165 was discharged to 04 Short Term General Hospital. A review of progress notes revealed the following: - A progress note dated 01/23/2024 showed, Family has decided to transfer resident to [another local long term…

    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 · D2024-02-29 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to revise a care plan to reflect a resident's condition for one (Resident #151) of 33 sampled residents. Findings included: Review of Resident #151's Face Sheet revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] from an acute care hospital. His medical diagnoses included dementia, psychosis, anxiety disorder, encephalopathy, major depressive disorder, and insomnia. An observation conducted on 02/26/24 at 10:08 a.m. revealed Resident #151 sitting in a chair in the C-wing hallway with his eyes closed. An interview was conducted on 02/26/24 at 10:33 a.m. with Staff B, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). She said Resident #151 was pleasantly confused but redirectable. She said he did not push on doors or talk about leaving he will just walk the unit. The exit doors at the end of the hallway were not used and they had alarms on them if they were opened. A review of Resident #151's Elopement Risk assessment with a an observation date of 1/9/2024 and…

    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 · D2021-11-18 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, record reviews, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to properly document and address a resident grievance for one (Resident #21) of one resident sampled for grievances out of a total sample of 43 residents. Findings included: An interview was conducted on 11/16/2021 at 2:07 PM with Resident #21 in her room. Resident #21 stated that she had several personal items that had gone missing since her admission to the facility on [DATE], including a pink blanket that a family member had made for her and some personal clothing items. Resident #21 also stated that she informed the facility staff regarding her missing items but the items were not found. A review of Resident #21's Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment, dated 08/23/2021, under Section C - Cognitive Patters, a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13, which indicated that Resident #21 was cognitively intact. A review of Resident #21's Progress Notes revealed a note, dated on 09/11/2021 at 8:29 PM, which documented…

    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 · D2021-11-18 · tag F0700 — isolated
    Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
    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, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure assessment, consent, and proper fitting of bed rails for one (#115) of four residents sampled for accidents out of a total resident sample of 43. Findings included: According to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), accessed at https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/consumer-products/bed-rail-safety, indicated that Bed rails are used by many people to help create a supportive and assistive sleeping environment in homes, assisted living facilities and residential care facilities. This type of equipment has many commonly used names, including side rails, bed side rails, half rails, safety rails, bed handles, assist bars, or grab bars, hospital bed rails, and adult portable bed rails. On 11/16/21 at 10:28 a.m., Staff Member D, Agency Registered Nurse (RN), identified that Resident #115 had both left-sided and right-sided side rails. Observation with Staff D revealed the side rails were approximately 8-10 inches, shoulder level, and…

    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 · E2020-02-28 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    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 — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and facility record review, the facility failed to ensure proper food storage and labeling of food items stored in the main kitchen area and a clean and sanitary nursing unit pantry on one of three nursing units. Findings included: An initial tour of the kitchen was conducted on 02/25/20 at 09:22 a.m. with the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM). She stated the facility had a full-time Registered Dietician (RD). Today, there are 8 staff members manning the kitchen details. A tour of the Walk-in refrigerator commenced at 09:42 a.m. with a registered temperature of 37 degrees Fahrenheit. The CDM asked Staff Member H, Dietary Aide, to observe the storage area. The tour revealed unwrapped heads of lettuce, cantaloupes, cucumbers, and cabbage stored in plastic baskets with no dates and no labels. Photo evidence was taken. An opened bag of green onions with an expiration date of 1/24/20 was observed. Photo evidence was taken. A bag of opened peppers revealed no dated opened and unlabeled. A loosely wrapped bag of shredded carrots revealed no label and no date…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2020-02-28 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 2. Resident #280 was admitted on [DATE]. The Face Sheet included diagnoses but not limited to encounter for orthopedic aftercare following surgical amputation, acquired absence of right great toe, and unspecified site Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) infection. On 2/25/20 at 9:58 a.m., an observation revealed a red and white magnetic sign attached to the upper right hand of the door frame. The sign was very similar to other signs noted on other resident door frames that read No Smoking, Oxygen in Use. The sign attached to the outside of Resident #280's room read Isolation See Nurse, the sign did not indicate what type of transmission-based precautions were being utilized. The observation revealed two bins; one yellow and one red, inside of the room with a small plastic drawers next to the bins. A review of Resident #280's physician order, dated 2/15/20, included an order for Contact Precautions, MRSA to wound on right foot. The Infection Control Preventionist stated, on 2/28/20 at 4:09 p.m.,…

    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 · D2020-02-28 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    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, record reviews, and interviews the facility failed to ensure the physician response to pharmacy recommendations were implemented as written by the physician for two (#125 and #151) out of seven residents reviewed for the task of unneccessary medications. Findings included: Resident #125 was admitted on [DATE] and readmitted [DATE]. The Face Sheet included diagnoses not limited to Parkinson's disease, unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance, unspecified single episode major depressive disorders, and unspecified anxiety disorder. On 2/26/20 at 10:20 a.m., an interview was attempted with Resident #125. Resident #125 was upset, became tearful, and reported pain. A review of the pharmacy recommendation, dated 1/23/20, identified Resident #125 had an order for Clonazepam 0.5 milligram (mg) every 6 hours as needed (q6H prn) for anxiety. The recommendation included an order dated 2/4/20, to continue PRN use of this order for 30 days as the benefit outweighed the risk as Resident #125…

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to SOLARIS HEALTHCARE — 22 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 5 of 54.0+1.0 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 53.5+1.5 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 53.8+0.2 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.5-0.5 vs chain
The other 21 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.0★, per CMS)

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
PLANT CITY HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 10/20/2015
SOLARIS FOUNDATION INC.Organization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 10/06/2015
SOLARIS HEALTHCARE PROPERTIES LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 10/06/2015
CORLEY, SHAWNIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2022
PARKER, ASHLEYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/05/2021
BELL, THOMASIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2016
BERKOWITZ, MICHAELIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/01/2022
BUXBAUM, MIRIAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/01/2022
GREEN-RANGEL, TAMMYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 04/23/2018
HERZKA, CHAIMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/01/2022
OBERLANDER, JOSEPHIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/01/2022
ROSE, MARYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2016
PARKER, LAURIEIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/10/2025
NATIONAL HEALTH REALTY, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2016
BASKIN, ROBERTIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2016
PARKER, SHELBYIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2016

CMS files one row per role, so the 29 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

4 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.

$21.7M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+2.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$2.4M
Related-party expense12% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 66%Medicare 19%Other / private 16%

This home reported $2.4M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 12% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

Cost & finances

$337per resident / day
operating cost
$10,248per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$347per 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 105515. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-02-29, 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