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

Sun Terrace Health Care Center

105 Trinity Lakes Dr, Sun City Center, FL 33573 · For profit - Partnership · 130 certified beds · (813) 634-3324 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (813) 634-3324 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 11 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
139 S Pebble Beach Blvd Ste 207 · (813) 633-4000 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
105 Pebble Beach Blvd S · (813) 633-8082 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Winn Dixie<0.1 mi
4445 Sun City Center Blvd · (813) 634-1191 · Call to confirm hours
Park
5705 Hillsborough St · (813) 672-7881 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
701 Valley Forge Blvd · (813) 634-1292

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating 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 increased16.2%8.7%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.7%5.5%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.8%0.3%0.9%typical
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.3%0.7%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms9.4%4.6%6.5%worse
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.0%2.5%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened21.0%9.5%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication19.5%14.4%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%99.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.6%4.5%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control11.1%10.5%21.2%typical for the state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table4.5%8.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.1%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.9%94.7%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission25.9%26.1%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.6%9.1%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.572.131.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.551.151.80better

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

48.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 814 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

48.0%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
12.7%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
65.3%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
1.19U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.63hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.37hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.19hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 65.3% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 317 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 1.19 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 98% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% 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 SNF48.0%CMS range 44.4–51.051.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF12.7%CMS range 10.7–14.410.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge65.3%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge59.0%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 discharge57.1%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 identified98.9%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting98.3%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 discharge93.2%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 stay0.9%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 worsened2.8%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 hospitalization6.8%CMS range 4.8–9.27.1%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

0.77
RN hours/ resident / day
0.84
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.13
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.74
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.40
RN hoursweekends
48.5%
Total nursing turnover
51.7%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 130 beds and averages 124.3 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.74 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.77 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.13 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.19 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.97 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.92 to 0.40 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 48% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-06-06)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2022-03-17)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

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

  • Potential for harm · E2024-06-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was safely stored, covered, labeled, or discarded in the areas of the kitchen, walk-in cooler, walk-in freezer, reach-in freezer, and stock room (Photographic evidence obtained). Findings include: During an observation while conducting a walk-through tour of the kitchen with the Dietary Manager (DM) on 6/3/2024 starting at 8:40 AM, there were one large, perforated pan with raw chicken pieces thawing that was not in running water or covered; one sheet pan with 20 packages containing meat products with no identifying label or date on the pan or packages; three cases of health shakes, each containing 72 individual cartons, that were completely thawed and were in a case that read, Keep Frozen; and three containers containing pesto with no date or identifying label in the walk-in cooler. There was one opened large clear bag of a breaded food product with no label or date on the product in the walk-in freezer. There was French fries left opened and exposed to the elements in the reach-in freezer. During…

    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 · Dcited before2024-06-06 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received care and services for PICC (Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter) access device in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 of 3 reviewed residents with a PICC access device, Resident #104 (Photographic evidence obtained). Findings include: During an observation on 6/3/2024 at 9:52 AM, Resident #104's PICC line was visible in right upper arm. The transparent dressing over the gauze securing PICC and insertion site was not visible. The transparent dressing was peeling off on one side. The dressing was dated 5/28/2024. During an observation on 6/4/2024 at 10:22 AM, Resident #104's PICC line was visible in right upper arm. The transparent dressing over the gauze securing PICC and insertion site was not visible. The transparent dressing was peeling off on one side. The dressing was dated 5/28/2024. During an interview on 6/4/2024 at 10:22 AM, Resident #104 stated, I don't remember exactly when the dressing was changed, but they change the dressing about once a week.…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-06 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard 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

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure medical records were complete and accurate for 1 of 3 reviewed residents with PICC (Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter) line, Resident #104. Findings include: Review of Resident #104's physician order dated 5/14/2024 read, Dressing change every week and PRN [as needed]. RUA [Right Upper Arm] Measure length of line and circumference of arm upon admission/insertion then weekly. To measure length start from hub of PICC line to insertion site on forearm, to measure arm circumference measure at the insertion site around the forearm. Continue weekly until line discontinued. Document the length of line & circumference of arm upon admission/insertion below. PICC Line Length [blank] cm [centimeter]. Arm Circumference: [blank] cm, every day shift every 7 day(s) for IV [Intravenous] maintenance, Report s/s [sign and symptom] of infections/infiltration/dislodgement to MD [Medical Doctor]. Change dressing weekly and document measurement of line. Review of Resident #104's Medication Administration Record (MAR) for May 2024…

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

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

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff used proper PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) while providing high-contact care for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for transmission-based precautions, Resident #341, and failed to ensure staff performed hand hygiene between residents during meal tray delivery to help prevent the possible development and transmission of communicable disease and infections. Findings include: Review of Resident #341's physician order dated 6/4/2024 showed that it read, Enhanced Barrier Precautions for Dx [diagnosis] Wound every shift nurse to verify correct door signage and equipment present. During an observation on 6/5/2024 at 8:01 AM, Resident #341's door had a sign posted for Enhanced Barrier Precaution (EBP) use. Staff D, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA), wore gloves, but no gown, opened Resident #341's shared bathroom door from inside the bathroom and pushed Resident #341 in her wheelchair into the resident's room. After exiting Resident #341's bathroom with the resident, Staff D doffed her gloves and threw them…

    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 · D2022-03-17 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to maintain an environment that promotes dignity and privacy for one (Resident #87) of thirty five sampled residents. Findings included: A review of Resident #87's Medical Record revealed that Resident #87 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of generalized anxiety disorder and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A review of Resident #87's Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment revealed, under Section C - Cognitive Patterns, a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, which indicated that Resident #87 was cognitively intact. An observation of medication administration for Resident #87 was conducted on 03/16/2022 at 09:10 AM with Staff G, Registered Nurse (RN). After pulling Resident #87's medications from the medication cart, Staff G, RN knocked on Resident #87's door and asked permission to enter the room. Resident #87 granted Staff G, RN to enter her room and administer the medications. During the observation, Resident #87…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2022-03-17 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure the care plan was implemented related to preventing skin impairment for one (Resident #25) of three in-house acquired pressure injury residents, and 2. facility did not ensure to implement the plan of care for Resident # 37 regarding placement of an ankle brace and podus boots. Findings included: 1. Medical record review for Resident #37 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a re-admission date of 1/7/22. Resident #37 had multiple diagnoses not limited to paraplegia, spinal stenosis lumbar region, difficulty walking and generalized weakness. Resident #37 is alert and oriented with a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) of 14 indicating cognitively intact. A review of Resident #37's plan of care revealed that (Effective date 3/04/22) the resident was care planned for ADL (activities of daily living) self-care performance deficit related to chronic back pain, post laminectomy, impaired ROM (range…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2022-03-17 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    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 pressure injury prevention measures for one (Resident #25) of three residents sampled for in-house acquired pressure ulcers. Findings included: Resident #25's admission record revealed medical diagnoses of Parkinson's disease, unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance, muscle weakness, and congestive heart failure. The resident's minimum data set (MDS), dated [DATE], revealed the resident has impaired cognition and requires extensive assistance with two staff members for assistance in bed mobility, and has total dependence on staff for transfers. Further review of the resident's MDS revealed the resident is at risk for developing pressure ulcers/injuries. The resident has one or more unhealed pressure ulcers/injuries. Resident #25's care plan revealed a focus area for The resident has potential for impaired skin integrity, initiated on 2/07/2022, with interventions of encouraging patient to float heels whenever 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-01-08 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interviews, and medical record review the facility failed to ensure care plan interventions were implemented for one (#98) of 54 sampled residents as evidenced by Resident #98 not wearing an abductor wedge pillow between her legs as ordered and care planned. Findings Included: A record review for Resident #98 revealed admission diagnoses to include fracture of unspecified part of neck of Left Femur, subsequent encounter for closed fracture with routine healing, weakness, and difficulty walking. A review of active physician orders dated 12/05/2020 revealed an order to apply abductor wedge between legs when in wheelchair for LE (lower extremity) positioning every shift and dated 12/02/2020 Hip Range of Motion (ROM) precautions every shift. Record review of the admission Minimum data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) Score of 14, indicating the resident was cognitively intact. Review of the Care Plan for Resident #98 initiated on 12/4/20 revealed…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-01-08 · 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 record review, observation, and interviews the facility did not ensure appropriate physician's orders were obtained and implemented for nephrostomy tubes for one (#226) of 54 sampled residents. Findings included: A review of Resident #226's clinical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of iron deficiency anemia secondary to blood loss, according to the face sheet in the admission record. Review of the admission summary dated [DATE] reflected a left iliac crest (rear) nephrostomy tube site and right iliac crest (rear) nephrostomy tube site. The 12/19/20 skin check indicated 2. other nephrostomy. Review of the care plan dated 12/22/20 and revised on 12/30/20 showed a Focus area of nephrostomy tubes. The interventions included change tubes as ordered and monitor tubes as ordered. A review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, section H, bladder and bowel, dated 1/8/21 reflected an indwelling catheter (including Suprapubic catheter and nephrostomy tube). A review…

    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 · D2021-01-08 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines, the facility failed to ensure an indwelling urinary catheter bag and tubing was maintained off the floor to prevent potential infection for one resident #(243) during two of two observations, of 5 residents with catheters. Findings included: On 1/05/21 at 4:30 PM, an observation of Resident #243 revealed he was lying in bed with the urinary catheter bag and tubing on the left side of the bed hanging from the bed frame and resting on the floor. The catheter bag was completely on the floor. On 1/07/21 at 8:44 AM, another observation was conducted. Resident #243 was in his bed watching TV. The bed was in the low position near the floor. The catheter bag was sitting completely on the floor near the head of the bed on the resident's left side facing the door. The tubing was also on the floor. On 1/07/21 at 8:46 AM, an interview and observation was conducted with Staff I, LPN UM. Staff I, LPN UM confirmed the catheter bag and tubing were on the floor. A review of Resident #243's clinical…

    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 · D2021-01-08 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolated
    Provide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure laboratory services were provided in a timely manner in accordance with physician orders for one (#112) of 54 sampled residents related to a lipid panel. Findings included: A medical record review was conducted for Resident #112 to ensure that the Medication Regimen Review recommendations were being followed. A review of Resident #112's admission record revealed a diagnosis of hyperlipidemia. A review of the Pharmacist Medication Regimen Review for the last three months revealed that on 11/22/2020 a recommendation was made for a lipid panel now and every 12 months to monitor the medication of Atorvastain. There was a physician signature on the form acknowledging the pharmacist recommendation and a signature by Staff C, Registered Nurse (RN) Unit Manager (UM) that documented noted and the date of 11/30/20. Further medical record review revealed a physician's order was written in the computerized system on 11/30/2020 for a lipid panel in the a.m. and then yearly per pharmacy recommendation. A review of the lab…

    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.

    Administration 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
WIERZBA, KYLEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/27/2021
KENNEDY, DEBORAHIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/01/2003
PARTEE, LESLIEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 12/01/2022
CLEAR CHOICE HEALTH CARE LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/01/2007
HAFEEZ, NAUMAANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/28/2021
SAK JR LLCOrganizationLIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 06/29/2000
SAMUEL B KELLET QTIP MRTL TROrganizationLIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 12/01/2022
SBK LLCOrganizationLIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 06/29/2000
KELLETT, STILESIndividualLIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTERESTsince 06/29/2000

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 9 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.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$19.7M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+3.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.3M
Related-party expense7% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 43%Medicare 30%Other / private 27%

This home reported $1.3M 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

$426per resident / day
operating cost
$12,955per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$441per 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 105319. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-06-06, 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