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

John Knox Village Of Pompano Beach

700 SW 4th Street, Pompano Beach, FL 33060 · Non profit - Corporation · 194 certified beds · (954) 783-4001 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (954) 783-4001 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0604) — cited Apr 2024
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (26% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score

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 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Urgent care / clinic
150 SW 12th Ave · (954) 532-6409 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1400 SW 8th St · (954) 782-7130 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
450 SW 12th Ave · (954) 946-5010 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Place of worship
350 SW 12th Ave · (561) 866-7010

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 3 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased19.0%8.7%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.0%5.5%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.3%0.3%0.9%typical for the state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.1%0.7%2.0%typical
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%4.6%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
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 injury2.8%2.5%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened17.8%9.5%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication15.1%14.4%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine92.4%99.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.9%4.5%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control19.8%10.5%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table21.5%8.6%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.5%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine87.2%94.7%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission25.7%26.1%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.8%9.1%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.262.131.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.981.151.80better

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

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.

60.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 880 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

60.4%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
60.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.47U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.23hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.19hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 60.6% 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 406 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 0.47 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 78% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 26% 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 SNF60.4%CMS range 56.7–63.651.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.4%CMS range 8.7–12.110.7%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 discharge60.6%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 discharge54.2%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 discharge45.6%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 identified98.7%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 setting99.2%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 discharge99.6%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 stay0.7%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 worsened2.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.9%CMS range 5.2–8.77.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.991.02Oct 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

1.13
RN hours/ resident / day
0.68
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.58
Aide hours/ resident / day
5.39
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.90
RN hoursweekends
25.8%
Total nursing turnover
22.7%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 194 beds and averages 162.4 residents a day — about 84% occupied, or roughly 32 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 5.39 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.13 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.58 is at or above 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 5.08 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.51 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.22 to 0.90 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 26% is below 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

5
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-07-31)
6
at the previous standard inspection (2024-04-04)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · E2025-07-31 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — pattern
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to follow the approved menu for substitutions for residents with orders for mechanically altered diets for 3 of 27 sampled residents with orders for mechanical soft diets (Resident #18, #178 and #182). The findings included:Record review revealed the approved menu for the lunch meal on 07/28/25 documented that residents with orders for Mechanical Soft textures were to be served three-bean salad in place of coleslaw. The approved menu for the breakfast meal on 07/29/25 documented that residents with orders for Mechanical Soft textures were to be served bite sized sausage patties in place of bacon strips 1. Resident #178 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. According to the resident's admission Evaluation, with a reference date of 07/23/25, Resident #178's cognition was documented as 'Alert and lethargic', with unclear speech and was 'sometimes' able to understand. The assessment documented that the resident was dependent upon staff for…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-07-31 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — pattern
    Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
    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 provide the correct diet consistency for the Mechanical Soft diet for 3 of 3 sampled residents reviewed for Nutrition (Resident #32, Resident #177 and Resident #162).The findings included:1. Record review revealed Resident #32 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Parkinsons Disease without Dyskinesia and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. The admission Medicare - 5 Day Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed that the resident's Brief Interview of Mental Status (BIMS) score was 13, which indicates intact cognition.A review of physician orders dated 07/14/25 revealed the following: Regular diet, Mechanical Soft Ground/Moist texture and thin consistency.In an observation conducted on 07/28/2025 1:00 PM, this surveyor observed that Resident #32's meal tray consisted of a chopped crispy fish sandwich. The bread was cut into two triangular pieces without borders.2. Record review revealed that Resident…

    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 · D2025-07-31 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to follow the professional standards of practice regarding the care and management of a resident receiving a nebulizing therapy for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #96); failed to conduct an electrical safety inspection for a nebulizing treatment machine for 1 of 3 sample residents (Resident #92); failed to follow their own policy for verifying a practitioner's orders for nebulizing therapy for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #156); failed to comply with the standards of transmission-based precautions during a nebulizing therapy; and failed to care and manage the nebulizing therapy supplies after a treatment for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident # 96). The findings include: A review of a facility policy titled, Nebulizer Therapy, with a revision date of 01/25, revealed the following: Nebulizer treatments, once ordered, is to be administered by nursing staff as directed using proper technique and standard precautions; verify…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on policy review, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to follow the professional standards of practice regarding following physician orders of not taking blood pressure (BP) on the left arm for 1 of 1 sampled dialysis resident (Resident #9). The facility also failed to follow the physician order for fluid restriction for 1 of 1 sampled dialysis resident (Resident #9). The findings include: Review of a facility policy titled, Dialysis Care and Services, undated, revealed that elder guests who require dialysis receive such care and services consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the elder's guest's goals and preferences. Record review revealed Resident #9 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Metabolic Encephalopathy, End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD), and Dependence on Renal Dialysis. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 07/08/25, documented under Section C of the Brief…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-31 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to follow the standards or transmission-based precautions for 1 of 3 sampled residents for nebulizing therapy (Resident # 96), for 1 sampled resident for gastrostomy tube feeding (Resident #63), and for 1 of 2 sampled residents reviewed for urinary care (Resident #138). The facility additionally failed to initiate Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #9). The facility also failed to follow its own appearance policy regarding wearing false and polished fingernails for 3 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #96, Resident #138, and Resident #9). The findings include:The findings included: A review of facility's policy titled, Nebulizer Therapy, undated, revealed the following:It is to be administered by nursing staff as directed using proper techniques and standard precautions. [NAME] gloves and other personal protective equipment (PPE) as needed to comply with standard or transmission-based precautions…

    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 · Ecited before2024-04-04 · 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 observation and interview, the facility failed to provide housekeeping and mainteance services necessary to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable interior for the following: [NAME] House (8 of 12 resident rooms), [NAME] House (8 of 12 resident rooms), Poinciana House (8 of 12 resident rooms), Egret House (7 of 12 resident rooms), Pine House (3 of 12 resident rooms), and Magnolia House (2 of 12 resident rooms). The findings included: 1) During the resident screenings conducted on 04/01/24 at 9 AM, and the Environment Tour conducted of the Seventh Floor ([NAME] House and Poinciana House) on 04/01/24 at 11:30 AM with the facility's Assistant Director of Maintenance and Registered Nurse Training Educator, the following were noted: [NAME] Unit (Rooms #7101-7112): room [ROOM NUMBER]: Room chair exterior worn and soiled, room walls (4) noted damaged and in disrepair with numerous areas of large black scuff marks, and bathroom toilet paper holder broken. room [ROOM NUMBER]: The portable over-commode…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-04-04 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for potentially 47 residents residing within the [NAME] House (11 Residents), Dolphin House (13 Residents), Egret House (12 Residents, and Oak House (11 Residents). The findings included: 1) During the kitchen sanitation tour of the [NAME] House conducted on 04/01/24 at 9 :30 AM and accompanied with the facility's Registered Nurse Educator, the following were noted: (a) The interior of the kitchen ovens (2) were noted to be heavily worn, soiled, and covered with carbon build-up. (b) The exteriors of the kitchen cabinets were noted to be heavily worn, had areas of peeling paint, and numerous areas of dried food matter. (c) The ceiling mounted air-conditioning vent located over the serving preparation area of the kitchen was noted with a build up of dust and black mold type matter. (d) The ceiling area (4 feet) around the air-conditioning vent had a…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-04-04 · 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

    Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to implement measures for infection control practices during laundry services for the Woodland Houses and Seaside Cove. In addition, the facility failed to maintain a sanitary laundry area for their central laundry. The findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled, Laundry Services- Handling of Soiled and Contaminated Laundry, undated, included the following: To implement practices on proper handling of laundry/personal clothing that prevent gross microbial contamination of the air and persons handling the linen. Guiding Principles: Sorting of each resident's linen/laundry and identification during laundry process will be done to prevent cross contamination and inaccurate distribution. Availability of (PPE) Protective Personal Equipment (e.g. gowns if soiling of clothing is likely). Sanitation of machine basket between each use. Clean lint catcher in dryer after each use. Proper infection control practices. Guide or Designee will provide education to Shahbaz on the proper handling of soiled 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-04-04 · 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 observation, record review, and interview, it was determined that the facility staff were responsible for causing the resident call system to be ineffective on resident rooms located on resident's the Egret Unit, [NAME] Unit, Poinciana Unit, and Ibis Unit that effected Resident's #82, #38, #125, #28, #54, #157, #69, #24, #126, and #378. The findings included: 1) During the observation tour conducted of the of [NAME] Unit (Room's #7101-7112) and the Poinciana Unit (Room's # 7201-7212) on 04/01/24 at 12:30 PM, accompanied with the facility's Registered Nurse Educator, [NAME]/Poinciana Guide, and Assistant Director of Maintenance, it was noted that the bathroom emergency call pull cords were wrapped around the wall handrails or were placed on top of the sink vanity. Both resulted in the call bells being not able to be pulled or reached by staff and/or residents during in need of assistance or emergency. The specifics included the following: (a) Resident #82 (room [ROOM NUMBER]) - review of the resident…

    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 · D2024-04-04 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
    Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
    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, observations and interviews, the facility failed to assess 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #63) for the use of bilateral full bed rails; failed to determine a medical symptom for the need of the bilateral use of full bed rails; and failed to obtain a consent from the resident's representative to use the full bed rails. The findings included: Review of the facility's policy titled Proper Use of Bed Rails revised on 01/2023 documents .physical restraint is defined as any manual method, physical or mechanical device, equipment .that meets all of the following criteria: is attached or adjacent to the resident's body; cannot be removed easily by the resident .resident assessment must also assess the resident's risk from using bed rails potential risks with the use of bed rails include: accident hazards (e.g. entrapment and other injuries sustained from attempts to climb over, around, between or through the rails .barrier to residents from safely getting out of bed .the facility will assess…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-04-04 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on review of policy and procedure, observation, record review and interview, it was determined that the facility failed to obtain a physician's order for the monitoring and the continued care and services of a left arm skin tear wound and of a right lower leg blood-filled blister for 1 of 1 sampled residents observed, (Resident #150). The findings included: Review of the facility policy and procedure titled, Skin Tear, provided by the Director of Nursing (DON) with a reviewe date of 07/14/23, documented in the Policy Statement: .7. Put an order into Point-Click-Care (PCC) to monitor skin tear to the affected area for signs of bleeding and infection Record review revealed Resident #150 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included Type II Diabetes Mellitus, Acute Kidney Failure, Parkinson's Disease, Vascular Dementia, Anemia, Multiple Sclerosis, Bradycardia, Hypertension, Atherosclerotic Heart Disease and Cardiac Pacemaker. He had a Brief Interview Mental Status (BIM) score of 15…

    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 · Ecited before2023-01-20 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide housekeeping and maintenance services necessary to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable interior for the Woodland Home (Swan, Orchid, Dove, Magnolia, Ibis, Seagrape, Egret, Pine, [NAME], [NAME], and Poinciana) and Seaside Cove (Sailfish and Pompano). The findings included: 1) During the initial screening of residents and observation of their rooms on 1/17/23 and the Environmental Tour of the Woodland Building, conducted on 1/18/23 at 1 PM accompanied by the Administrator, the following were noted: Swan Home (Rooms #2101-2112): room [ROOM NUMBER] - Room walls noted to be in disrepair and numerous large black scrapes and scuff marks, bathroom door exterior noted to have numerous large black scrapes and scuff, and the television was not working. room [ROOM NUMBER] - Room walls noted to be in disrepair and numerous large black scrapes and scuff marks, bathroom door exterior was noted to have numerous large black scrapes 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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-01-20 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, record review and review of policy and procedure, the facility failed to ensure that it secured and locked ten (10) over-the-counter (OTC) and two (2) un-ordered prescription medications for 6 of 6 sampled residents observed, (Resident #54, Resident #19, Resident #136, Resident #26, Resident #70 and Resident #148); and, the facility failed to promptly discard two (2) expired OTC medications for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #26). The findings included: Review of the facility policy and procedure titled, Storage of Medications, provided by the Director of Nursing (DON), revised [DATE], documented, The facility shall store all drugs and biologicals in a safe, secure, and orderly manner Policy Interpretation and Implementation 4. The facility shall not use discontinued, outdated, or deteriorated drugs or biologicals 8. Drugs shall be stored in an orderly manner in cabinets, drawers, carts, or automatic dispensing systems. Each resident's medications shall be assigned to an…

    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 · D2023-01-20 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolated
    Ensure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow physician ordered Fluid Restriction/Renal Diet for 1 of 9 sampled residents selected for nutritional review (Resident #35). The findings included: 1) Review of the facility's policy for Restricting Fluids noted the following: * When a resident has been placed on restricted fluids, remove the water pitcher and cup from the room. Remove all fluid containers from the room 2) Review of the facility's Renal Diet noted the following: * Fruits- Not Recommended - High Potassium foods including Oranges * Vegetables Not Recommenced - High Potassium foods including Potatoes During the review of the clinical record of Resident #35, it was noted that the resident's admission date to the facility was on 06/06/22. The resident's diagnoses included, End Stage Renal Disease, Dependence on Renal Dialysis, Acute Kidney Failure, Chronic Kidney Disease Stage IV, and Hyponatremeia. Resident #35's Current Physician Orders included: * 11/9/22 - Fluid…

    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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
JOHN KNOX VILLAGE OF FLORIDA, INC.OrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2002
ARONOWITZ, RICHARDIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 07/14/2023
CLARK, MICHELLEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 01/13/2020
CLARKE, RICHARDIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 07/14/2023
CRISSY, JACKIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 08/25/2022
DE JONG, DIRKIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 09/12/2022
DEMERS, STEPHENIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 03/01/2024
FISHER, LAMARIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 01/09/2023
GALLO, WILLIAMIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/12/2026
KENNEDY, KARENIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 12/01/2023
MCDOWELL, THOMASIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 09/12/2022
O'FLANNERY ANDERSON, JENNIFERIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 07/14/2023
RECHKEMMER, CLARKIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/01/2024
SIMPSON, CHRISTINEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/01/2025
FOLSOM, DOUGLASIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/08/2025
HONIG, MELISSAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/06/2025
KELLY, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/08/2025
MCINTYRE, KELLYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/16/2022
CENTER FOR INNOVATIONOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/14/2022
CLIFTONLARSONALLEN LLPOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/18/2017
HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.OrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/31/2023
NEXDINE LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/26/2022
POINTCLICKCARE CORP.OrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/08/2014
QUALITY CARE REHAB INCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/01/2015
TRUSTBRIDGE INC.OrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/28/2022
ALI, KIMBERLYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/01/2020
ALI, KRISTAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/02/2025
BELAY, MINILIKIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/07/2020
BERMUDEZ, JUANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2019
BYARD, BRANDONIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/08/2025
CAMP THOMAS, KELLIEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/15/2023
COLLINS, TAMISHAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/15/2019
ETIENNE, JENNIFERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/12/2022
EVANS, ELIZABETHIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/07/2023
GOLD, IVYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/09/2009
HOLLINGSWORTH, ESLIEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/29/2022
HOPKINS, SAMUELIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2025
KIMBERLY, AMYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/14/2024
KOCH, HOWARDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/01/2021
MARTE, EVELYNIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/15/2024
MCCULLOUGH, TATYANAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/25/2015
MOONEY, JENNIFERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/17/2025
PRICE, THOMIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/17/2016
SAINT CHARLES, ANOUKAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/06/2023
SALEM, HANAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/27/2018
STEVENS, JENNIFERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/24/2023
THELUSME, JOUCIRCLAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/29/2024
WHITING, KIRSTENIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/18/2017
WILLIAMS, DEBBIEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/23/2019
ZAPATA-JONES, JENNIFERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/24/2023
OBERLANDER, CAROLYNIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 10/19/2015

CMS files one row per role, so the 92 rows in the source record cover these 51 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

8 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.

$20.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 7%Medicare 25%Other / private 68%

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

$1,183per resident / day
operating cost
$35,971per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$339per 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 105255. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-31, 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