Egret Cove Center
550 62nd St S, Saint Petersburg, FL 33707 · Non profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (727) 347-6151 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a high number of inspection citations overall (20) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $5,346 in federal fines (most recent 2024-10-18)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
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 | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 2 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 10.2% | 8.7% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 8.1% | 5.5% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 0.7% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 4.6% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.0% | 2.5% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 13.5% | 9.5% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 30.0% | 14.4% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 99.2% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.3% | 4.5% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 6.4% | 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 table | 25.0% | 8.6% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.3% | 1.5% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.7% | 94.7% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 24.4% | 26.1% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 13.8% | 9.1% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.13 | 2.13 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.77 | 1.15 | 1.80 | typical |
* 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.
33.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 81 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 28.6% 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 70 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 0.41 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 70% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 29% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 33.9%CMS range 23.6–45.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.5%CMS range 8.5–15.3 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | 28.6% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 28.6% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 17.1% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 96.2% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | 92.7% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.9% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 1.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.4%CMS range 4.0–11.3 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.06 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 101.0 residents a day — about 84% occupied, or roughly 19 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.13 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.51 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.98 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 2.94 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.21 on weekdays — 9% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.55 to 0.42 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 49% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.
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.
20 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 10 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2024-12-03 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility did not ensure timely administration of medications for two Residents (#2 and #3) of two Residents reviewed for receipt of prescribed medications and for two of two medication administration passes observed, resulting in thirty-one residents receiving medications outside of the facility's medication timing parameters. Findings Included: 1. A review of Resident #2's Medication Administration Audit Report for the month of October 2024 indicated the following: On 10/8/24, the following medications were scheduled to be administered at 9:00 a.m. and were documented on the Medication Administration Audit Report as administered at the following times: - Celebrex oral capsule 200 mg (milligrams), give 200 mg by mouth two times a day for moderate pain: Documented as administered at 10:54 a.m. - Lidocaine External patch 5%, apply to lower back topically one time a day for lower back pain, remove at 2100: Documented as administered at 10:56 a.m. - Allopurinol oral tablet 300 mg, give 1 tablet by mouth one time a day for gout:…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-10-18 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — patternMake 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
Based on observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure adequate placement of call assistance equipment to call for staff assistance for six (#7, #8, #9, #10, #11, and #13) of fourteen sampled residents. Findings include: A tour of the facility was initiated on 10/17/2024 at 9:32 a.m. The following observations were conducted during the tour. During an observation on 10/17/2024 at 9:35 a.m., Resident #7 was seen in bed with severe contractures of his arms and legs, curled in a fetal like position, and with his arm wrapped in his leg. He was observed watching television. Resident #7 was able to answer questions. When asked if he could use his call bell light. the resident did not answer but turned his head towards the feeding tube pole. An observation was conducted of Resident #7's call bell light laying on the floor at the bottom of the tube feeding pole. Photographic evidence obtained. Resident's call bell light was observed to be a push button type call bell that would require dexterity of the hand to hold and depress the button. On 10/17/2024 at 10:06 a.m., 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-18 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to have evidence of the provision of a summary of the baseline care plan to the resident and their representative for one (#12) of fourteen sampled residents. Findings included: On 10/17/2024 at 10:30 a.m., Resident #12 was observed in his bed with his eyes closed. An interview was conducted at this time with his spouse. Resident #12's spouse said she had not been able to receive communication about what the plan was for her husband, how long he was going to be at the facility, or what services they were going to provide to him. At approximately 10:40 a.m., Resident #12 was observed to be awake. He stated he wanted to understand the services that were to be provided to him during his stay and why he needed to be at the facility. A review of Resident #12's admission Record reflected an admission of 10/11/2024. Resident #12's diagnosis list included Urinary Tract infection, Nontoxic Multinodular goiter, and occlusion and stenosis of unspecified carotid artery. On 10/18/2024 at approximately 8:45 a.m., the Nursing…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-18 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to develop and/or implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for four (#7, #8, #9, and #11) of fourteen sampled residents. Findings included: 1. On 10/17/2024 at 9:35 a.m., Resident #7 was observed in bed. He was observed curled in a fetal like position, his arm was wrapped in his leg, watching the television. He was observed to have severe contractures, and dry lips. When asked if staff put moisture product on his lips, he shook his head. When asked if he was provided pleasure foods by mouth, he stated sometimes. When asked if he was allowed to have water by mouth, he said, sometimes. He stated he would like water. He said his arm was stuck. When asked if he could use his call bell light. the resident did not answer but turned his head towards the feeding tube pole. An observation was conducted of Resident #7's call bell light laying on the floor at the bottom of the tube feeding pole. Resident #7's breakfast meal tray, untouched,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-18 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a timely respiratory assessment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for one (#2) of three sampled residents related to an assessment of a resident in distress. Findings included: Resident #2 was admitted on [DATE] and discharged on 09/15/2024. Review of the Admissions Record showed the diagnoses included but not limited to Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypercapnia, dependent on oxygen, pleural effusion, pulmonary hypertension, Hypertension, and Asthma. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 or cognitively intact. Review of Section GG, Functional Abilities and Goals showed substantial to maximum assistance for bathing. Section O, Special Treatments, Procedures, and Programs showed C1. oxygen therapy. G1. Non-invasive mechanical ventilator was blank (BIPAP/ Bi-level positive…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-18 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted 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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the clinical record contained documentation of the services provided for meal consumption for one (#7) of fourteen sampled residents. Findings included: 1. On 10/17/2024 at 9:35 a.m., Resident #7 was observed in bed. He was observed to have severe contractions, curled in a fetal like position. Resident #7 was able to answer questions. When asked if he was provided pleasure foods by mouth, he stated sometimes. When asked if he was allowed to have water by mouth, he said, sometimes. He stated he would like water. Resident #7's breakfast meal tray was observed to be positioned on the sink counter. The meal tray was observed to be untouched. A review of Resident #7's admission Record documented an original admission in 08/2023, and a re-admission on [DATE]. Resident #7's diagnosis information included, but not limited to: Muscle wasting and atrophy, muscle weakness, Dysphagia, and Spinal Stenosis. A review of Resident #7's Care Plan…
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.
- Potential for harm · F2024-05-16 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide 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 1) failed to initiate an Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) isolation program for thirteen out of thirteen residents on EBP and, 2) failed to implement an effective infection control program related to facility failure to handle, store, process, and transport all linens and laundry in accordance with infection control practices to produce hygienically clean laundry for 105 out of 105 residents in the facility. Findings included: On 05/15/24 at 11:09 a.m., an interview was conducted with the Director of Nursing (DON) regarding infection control for isolation residents. The DON stated newly arrived residents are screened for any isolation precautions from the transferring facility. The placement of the newly admitted residents depends on their isolation needs and if they can cohabitate with another resident. The DON admitted knowledge of the Center for Disease Controls (CDC) new Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) recommendations announced in February 2024, and stated thirteen residents have been identified in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-05-16 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the development, revision, and/or implementation of comprehensive care plans was completed for two (Resident #259 and #73) of six sampled residents. The findings include: Review of the admission Record for Resident #73 revealed an admission date of 10/3/2022 and a recent admission of 3/16/2024 with diagnoses to include: end stage renal disease; heart failure; diabetes type 1; cachexia; hyperkalemia; protein-calorie malnutrition; muscle wasting and atrophy; and other co-morbidities. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) from admission dated 3/18/2024, showed Resident #73 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14 out of 15, which indicated intact cognition. The MDS showed the resident had no identified moods or behaviors and was on hemodialysis. Review of Resident #73's Physician Order Summary dated 5/16/2024, showed an order for a 1500 cc Fluid Restriction Dietary to give 1200cc nursing to give up to 300cc/24hr 7-3 (120cc), 3-11 (120cc), 11-7 (60c) every shift Fluids to be given with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-16 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolatedHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
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 give the opportunity to choose urinal placement and length of the bed frame for one (Resident #104) of one resident sampled. An interview was conducted with Resident #104 on 5/13/2024 at 10:30 a.m. He stated he did not want the urinal on the over the bed table all of the time. He said he was able to smell the urine all the time, even when the urinal was empty. He said he had numerous conversations with personnel in the past. He stated there was not anywhere else for the urinal to be placed without having to call for assistance. He stated, They [the facility] doesn't have a place for the urinal and they don't listen, I have told them numerous times and continue to tell them, I don't like to eat with the urinal next to my tray. He stated he needed a longer bed due to his height, as his feet were always pressing on the footboard. He said the nurse told him nothing could be done and placed a pillow under his feet. On 5/13/2024 at 12:18 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-16 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure 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, observation, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was accurately coded for two (Residents #24 and #17) of twenty-six sampled residents. Finding include: During an observation and interview on 05/13/24 at 10:45 a.m., Resident #24 was sitting up in his bed eating peanuts. He said his left hand was contracted. He said he wore a splint on his left hand, but staff had not assisted him with putting it on. He said sometimes he refused to put his splint on because it hurt his hand. Review of an admission Record dated 05/15/2024 showed Resident # 24 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include but not limited to Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis following unspecified Cerebrovascular Disease Affecting Left Non- Dominant Side, Major Depressive Disorder, Recurrent, Unspecified, Bipolar Disorder, Unspecified. Review of the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14…
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.
Show the remaining 10 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-16 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop a care plan related to trauma informed care for one (Resident #103) out of 37 sampled residents. Findings included: Review of Resident #103's admission Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] from an acute care hospital. Her medical diagnoses included but were not limited to post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, major depressive disorder, and adjustment disorder with anxiety. An interview was conducted on 05/13/24 at 3:40 p.m. with Resident #103. She confirmed she had PTSD but declined to give details about the PTSD. She gave permission to ask the staff and review her record related to the details. She said she saw psychiatry and psychology every week. She said they also gave her medication for it and she felt it helped. Review of Resident #103's physician orders showed an order with a start date of 4/5/24, without an end date, for Prazosin HCl Oral Capsule (Prazosin…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-16 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure Activities of Daily Living ADL grooming was provided for one (Resident # 101) out of eight residents sampled. Findings include: During observations made on 05/13/2024 at 10:30 a.m. and on 05/14/2024 at 3:00 p.m., Resident #101 was observed laying down in his bed with his call light within reach, dressed in his nightgown. He was observed with some missing teeth in his mouth and facial hair. The resident's room was observed well-lit and with a homelike environment. Review of Resident #101's admission Record dated 05/16/2024 showed Resident #101 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnose to included but not limited to respiratory disorder in diseases classified elsewhere, other reduced mobility, and need for assistance with personal care. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 00 which indicated Resident 101 was unable to complete the interview. Review of a care plan…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-16 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice related to 1. transportation for coordination of care to their doctors' appointment for four (Residents # 209, #33, #7, and #58) out of 10 residents sampled and 2. application of a medication patch for one (Resident #81) of one sampled resident. Findings include: During an observation on 05/13/2024 at 10:00 a.m., Resident #209 was observed dressed in a nightgown, sitting in her wheelchair in her room. She was observed with soiled bandages on her right and left foot. Resident said she had been up since 9:00 a.m. this morning waiting to go to her appointment for her skin grafts on her feet. She said she had missed a couple of appointments already because transportation did not always show up to pick her up for her appointments. During an observation on 5/13/2024 at 1:00 p.m., Resident #209 was observed sitting in her room in her wheelchair,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-16 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility 1. failed to ensure a physician order was in place for the administration of oxygen for one (Resident #21) out of four residents reviewed for respiratory care, and 2. failed to ensure emergency tracheostomy supplies were readily available for one (Resident #97) out of one resident with a tracheostomy tube. Findings included: 1. An observation was conducted on 05/13/24 at 9:33 a.m. Resident #21 was observed in bed with her eyes closed, an oxygen concentrator was on and set to 1.5 liters per minute (LPM), the oxygen tubing observed to be behind the residents back and not on the resident. An observation was conducted on 05/13/24 at 3:30 p.m. Resident #21 was observed in bed with her eyes open, nasal cannula in her nose, an oxygen concentrator was on and set to 1.5 LPM. The resident said she wore oxygen for her chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and she was supposed to be on 6 LPM. She said she had been asking since last week to get oxygen on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-16 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow the comprehensive person-centered care plan and physician orders for one (Residents #73) of one sampled resident who required dialysis, which included providing dietary needs (breakfast/snacks). Findings included: During an interview on 5/14/2024 at 8:45 a.m., Resident #73 stated he did not receive breakfast or a snack to take to dialysis. If needed, he had the driver of the transport stop at the convenience store. Resident #73 stated it would be nice if breakfast was provided as I have to leave at 5:45 a.m. and am gone until lunch, that is a long time without food. Review of the admission Record for Resident #73 showed an admission date of 10/3/2022 and a recent admission of 3/16/2024 with diagnoses to include: end stage renal disease; heart failure; diabetes type 1; cachexia; hyperkalemia; protein-calorie malnutrition; muscle wasting and atrophy; and other co-morbidities. Review of Resident #73's physician Order Summary dated…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-16 · tag F0732 — isolatedPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to post the nurse staffing data to ensure the information was readily accessible to all residents and visitors during two of four days of survey. Findings included: On 5/13/2024 at 9:52 a.m., an observation revealed the total number and actual hours worked per shift for licensed and unlicensed staff responsible for resident care was not posted. On 5/16/2024 at 8:52 a.m. an observation revealed the total number and actual hours worked per shift for licensed and unlicensed staff responsible for resident care was not posted. During an interview on 5/16/2024 at 11:15 a.m., Staff P, CNA staffing coordinator stated responsibility for posting the staffing numbers. Staff P stated posting the numbers for two days at a time to ensure the weekends are covered. Staff P, stated with the surveyors coming in on Monday the posting was delayed and the same must have happened this morning. Staff P stated posting the information today although it was later in the morning. Review of the facility policy and procedure with the topic: Staffing dated…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-16 · tag F0847 — isolatedInform resident or representatives choice to enter into binding arbitration agreement and right to refuse.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility did not ensure residents who entered arbitration agreements understood the contract contents for one (Resident #259) of three residents sampled. Findings included: During an interview on 5/14/2024 at 10:04 a.m., the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) stated there was only one resident who had signed an arbitration agreement. The NHA stated all residents were presented the option to review and sign the arbitration agreements upon admission. The NHA stated the admission Director (AD) was responsible for the arbitration agreements and expectation was that everyone understood what was being signed. Review of the admission Record for Resident #259 showed an admission date of 4/22/2024, with diagnoses to include Schizophrenia; Anxiety Disorder; Other Genetic related Intellectual Disability; Malignant Neoplasm of Bladder; and other co-morbidities. The Responsible Party/Guarantor listed indicated it was not Resident #259. Review of the Arbitration Agreement - Resident Booklet, was signed by Resident #259 and the admission Coordinator (AC) on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2022-05-05 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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 policy review, the facility failed to appropriately secure medications in the entrance of two resident rooms (Rooms #18 and #305); and failed to ensure appropriate storage of medications in three of three medication carts located on 100 (South Hall), 300 and 400 (North Halls). Findings included: During an observation of room [ROOM NUMBER], on 05/03/2022 at 9:42 a.m., a small oval blue pill was observed at the entrance of the resident room. An immediate interview of Staff A, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), revealed the nurse was in the middle of medication administration and confirmed the presence of the unsecured tablet at the entrance of resident room [ROOM NUMBER]. She stated, I can't own it, I don't think it is mine. (PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE OBTAINED) On 05/03/2022 at 1:15 p.m., during an interview with Staff A, (LPN), she said she informed the Director of Nursing (DON) of the unsecured pill and disposed of the medication in the pill buster. On 05/03/2022 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-05-05 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the physician and document the refusal of laboratory blood tests on two occasions for one (Resident #59) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Findings included: Review of Resident #59's admission record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] from the community with diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease, mood affective disorder, major depressive disorder, cognitive communication deficit, and seizures. Review of Resident #59's Change in Condition Evaluation form dated 4/30/22 revealed Resident #59 had a seizure that started the morning of 4/30/22. Review of the mental status evaluation documented on the change in condition form revealed, altered level of consciousness with sudden change in level of consciousness or responsiveness. The physician was notified on 4/30/22 at 8:00 a.m. and recommended labs (blood tests). Review of Resident #59's treatment administration record (TAR) revealed a physician's order dated 4/30/22…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-01-15 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to implement fall risk care plan interventions of floor mats for one (Resident #30) of three residents sampled for falls. Findings included: A review of Resident #30's admission Record revealed the resident was readmitted to the facility at the end of July 2020. A review of Resident #30's quarterly Minimum Date Set (MDS) assessment, dated 8/11/2020 revealed he was unable to complete the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) interview, had short-term and long-term memory impairment, and was severely impaired for decision making. A review of a significant change MDS dated [DATE] revealed his cognitive status remained unchanged from the 8/11/2020 assessment. A review of Resident #30's Progress Notes, dated 8/15/2020 revealed the resident was found on the floor at 3:30 p.m. by a Certified Nursing Assistant [CNA]. Assessed by nurse for injuries, abrasion observed to back of lower right side of head. No s/s (signs and symptoms), 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.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
$5,346 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $5,346 — penalty dated 2024-10-18
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to HEARTHSTONE SENIOR COMMUNITIES — 8 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 1.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 1.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 3.3 | -1.3 vs chain |
The other 7 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.9★, 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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EGRET COVE REHABILITATION CENTER LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | NO PERCENTAGE PROVIDED | since 04/01/2009 |
| HEARTHSTONE SENIOR COMMUNITIES, INC. | Organization | 5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 04/01/2009 |
| GARNER, ALVIN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/01/2009 |
| JAFFE, HOWARD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/01/2009 |
| ROMBOLD, LORI | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/01/2009 |
| WYATT, BRIAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/01/2009 |
| CONSULTING SUPPORT SERVICES, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/08/2025 |
| FACILITY SUPPORT COMPANY, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/19/2025 |
| KANE FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 03/19/2025 |
| THEMIS HEALTH MANAGEMENT, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/08/2025 |
| BEEBE, BETHANY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/08/2021 |
| DAVIS EVERETT, BRENDA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/04/2022 |
| OMEGA HEALTHCARE INVESTORS, INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/01/2003 |
| SELECT REHABILITATION, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/19/2016 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 21 rows in the source record cover these 14 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
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.
About 81% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $219K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
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
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.
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 105293. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-05-16, 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.