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

Peninsula Health Center By Harborview

900 Beckett Way, Tarpon Springs, FL 34689 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 120 certified beds · (727) 934-0876 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (727) 934-0876 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
$22,231 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (34% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • the CMS record shows $22,231 in federal fines (most recent 2023-10-02)
  • 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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1162 Alternate Hwy 19 · (727) 937-3010 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
1933 N Pinellas Ave · (727) 944-5800 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
43380 US Highway 19 N · (772) 672-6000 · Call to confirm hours
Park
701 Brittany Park Blvd · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 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 2 to 3 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 rating3★
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 increased4.2%8.7%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight0.7%5.5%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.3%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.3%0.7%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms2.8%4.6%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.6%2.5%3.3%typical
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened6.6%9.5%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication20.2%14.4%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%99.2%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.8%4.5%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control4.7%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 table3.6%8.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.2%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine85.9%94.7%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission23.8%26.1%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit8.7%9.1%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.342.131.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.231.151.80better

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

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

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

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

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

32.9% 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 52 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

32.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.5%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
28.4%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.23U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.09hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.10hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 28.4% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 81 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 0.23 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 29% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF32.9%CMS range 21.9–48.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.5%CMS range 8.0–17.110.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge28.4%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge29.6%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 discharge14.8%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 identified96.6%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 setting91.9%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 discharge94.9%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 stay0.8%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 worsened6.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.8%CMS range 3.4–11.57.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.971.02Oct 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

0.55
RN hours/ resident / day
0.82
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.05
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.42
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.30
RN hoursweekends
33.7%
Total nursing turnover
42.9%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 110.8 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 9 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.42 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.545 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.05 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 3.10 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.55 on weekdays — 13% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.64 to 0.30 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 34% is below 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

8
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-09-19)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2022-07-08)

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · 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

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure two (#52 and #8) of eleven sampled residents , who dined in the main dining room, were provided and assisted with their meal until 30 and 40 minutes after all the others were served and ate their meal. Findings included: 1. On 9/16/2024 at 11:59 a.m., the main dining room was observed for lunch service. The room was observed with over twelve tables and many chairs. Prior to the meal observation, the room was used as a group activity, and there were many residents who were in attendance of that activity. After the activity was completed, there were nine residents who remained in the room to wait and be served their lunch. There were three staff members who were either talking/interacting with the residents in the room, or were providing them hydration. It was observed at this time, Residents #52 and #8 had been seated in the main dining room since the group activity ended. On 9/16/2024 at 12:08 p.m., a meal tray cart came out from the kitchen and the three staff members immediately began to serve and…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    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 did not ensure an assessment and physician orders were obtained for medication self-administration for one (#36) of eight residents sampled. Findings include: On 9/17/2024 at 9:41 a.m., an observation was made of Resident #36 in her room. A tracheostomy with a respiratory cap was visualized along with supplies for tracheostomy care. The resident stated she did most of her own tracheostomy care including her nebulizer treatments. Resident #36 stated her nebulizer medication was in her top left hand dresser drawer. Resident #36 gave permission to open drawer. An observation was made of two packets of Albuterol Sulfate Nebulization solution 0.63 mg/3 ml (milligram/milliliter) with one packet opened. Resident #36 stated she gave herself her own nebulizer treatment but the facility supplied her with the items and medication. A review of Resident #36's admission Record showed she was admitted to the facility with diagnoses which included but not limited…

    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 · D2024-09-19 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    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 did not ensure one (#67) out of eight residents sampled had the proper paperwork for the resident's code status. Findings include: A record review of Resident #67's physician orders show an order dated [DATE] for Do Not Resuscitate (DNR). Resident #67's medical record did not have the [Do Not Resuscitate order form] signed by the physician in the electronic medical record. On [DATE] at 9:55 a.m., an interview was conducted with Staff F, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). Staff F was assigned to the North wing of the facility and stated there was a DNR binder in the nurses' station in which all the residents in the entire facility with a DNR order were in the binder. Staff F, LPN stated there was another binder in the East wing nurses' station. Staff F, LPN stated the North wing DNR binder rational for all the residents was to account for the residents from the other wing (east) who might be transporting either walking or self-propelling via 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0655 — isolated
    Create 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a base line care plan was developed for the use of continuous oxygen therapy for two (#206 and #360) of twenty sampled residents who received oxygen therapy. Findings included: 1. On 9/16/2024 at 10:00 a.m., an observation and interview was conducted with Resident #206. She was lying in bed, under the covers and with the head of her bed at approximately 45 degrees. An oxygen concentrator was on the left side of the bed. The concentrator was on and the flow rate read 4.5 (lpm) liters a minute. The resident said she needed oxygen all the time and did not know what the flow rate should be. She confirmed it felt a little rushed in through her nose. When she found out the oxygen flow rate on the concentrator was at 4.5 lpm, she said that was too high. She revealed she had just been readmitted from the hospital and had been utilizing the oxygen since her readmission. Resident #206 revealed she had a diagnosis of Chronic Obstructive…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0659 — isolated
    Provide care by qualified persons according to each resident's written plan of care.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure services provided/arranged by an individual had the skills, experience, knowledge and licensure to perform tasks for one (#57) out of eight residents observed. Findings include: On 9/17/2024 at 8:15 a.m., an observation was made of an individual feeding Resident #57 in his high back wheelchair. An observation was made of the resident assisted by this individual to drink from a small plastic commercial bottle of apple juice without a straw. On 9/17/2024 at 10:14 a.m., an observation and interview were conducted in Resident#57's room with the individual sitting next to him. The individual sitting next to Resident #57 denied she was the resident's Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) but a companion hired by the family. Resident #57's hired companion stated she would feed the resident in which the staff would provide the meal tray. The hired companion stated she would do incontinence care for the resident as well and stated the staff would bring her the supplies such as briefs and linen. The hired companion…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    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 enteral feedings were provided according to physician orders for one (#67) of two residents observed. Findings include: On 9/16/2024 at 11:10 a.m., an observation was made of Resident #67's enteral feeding pump of the total volume infused at 22,525 milliliters (ml). Photographic evidence obtained. On 9/17/2024 at 9:30 a.m., an observation was made of Resident #67 out of her room with the enteral feeding hanging, bottle half empty and pumped turned off. Staff H, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) assigned to Resident #67 stated resident was out to dialysis. Staff H stated the resident was scheduled early for dialysis and left the facility between 5:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. On 9/17/2024 at 11:37 a.m., an observation was made of Resident #67 returning from dialysis and wheeled into her room by a staff member. On 9/17/2024 at 12:35 p.m., an observation was made in Resident #67's room. The enteral tube feedings had not been connected to the resident for enteral nourishment. Photographic evidence obtained. 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0773 — isolated
    Provide or obtain laboratory tests/services when ordered and promptly tell the ordering practitioner of the results.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not ensure the timeliness of reporting critical lab values for one (#67) out of eight residents sampled. Findings include: On 9/16/2024 at 11:10 a.m., an observation was made of Resident #67 in her room. Resident #67 was in bed, eyes closed with heavy breathing. Resident #67 did not wake up while interviewing her roommate. An unknown nursing staff member stated Resident #67 sleeps like that all the time. A review of Resident #67's medial record showed a critically low lab value dated 9/14/2024 for serum sodium of 127 millimoles per liter (mmol/L). A previous sodium level was from a lab drawn on 9/12/2024 with a sodium result of 132 mmol/L (normal 133-143 mmol/L). Photographic evidence obtained. On 9/17/2024 at 9:05 a.m., an interview was conducted with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) regarding the low critical serum sodium level dated 9/14/2024. The ADON stated she would call the dialysis center to have them collect a specimen for a repeat lab for the resident's chemistry but stated the results might take…

    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
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
    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 provide two (#206 and #54) of forty-four sampled residents with food items per their preference during one of three breakfast meal services observed. Findings included: 1. On 9/16/2024 at 10:00 a.m., Resident #206 was observed lying in bed, under the covers and with the head of the bed at approximately 45 degrees. She had an over the bed table placed in front of her with many personal items on it. During the visit, Resident #206 complained she was not receiving the correct diet and the food came to her cold, as well as she received things she did not like. On 9/17/2024 at 8:00 a.m., Resident #206 was observed in her room and seated upright in bed at 90 degrees. She was observed with her over the bed table placed in front of her with her breakfast tray on it, along with various other personal items. Her breakfast consisted of scrambled eggs, sausage, mashed potatoes, coffee, milk and water. The resident's meal ticket read she was to receive a Mechanical Soft CCHO [Controlled Carbohydrate] diet. Observation…

    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 · D2024-09-19 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a care plan was developed for the use of continuous oxygen therapy for one (#27) of twenty sampled residents who received oxygen therapy. Findings Included Review of the record for Resident # 27 revealed she was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Acute and Chronic Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set ( MDS ) assessment, dated July 7, 2024, revealed under Section J Health Conditions Shortness of Breath shortness of breath or trouble breathing with exertion and shortness of breath or trouble breathing when lying flat were both checked. An observation of Resident # 27 was conducted on 9/16/24 at 10: 28 a.m. She was observed seated in her wheelchair in her room wearing a nasal cannula in her nares. The nasal cannula and tubing was attached to an 02 concentrator set at 2 liters. Resident # 27 stated that she utilized her oxygen continuously and could not leave her room…

    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 · D2022-07-08 · tag F0645 — isolated
    PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility did not ensure a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level II was completed for one (Resident #97) of 32 sampled residents. Findings Included: A review of Resident #97's medical records revealed a Level I screen for Serious Mental Illness and/or Intellectual Disability or Related Conditions for Medicaid Certified Nursing Facility only. The Level I screen indicated Resident #97 had anxiety disorder, depressive disorder, and schizoaffective disorder. It also indicated the resident had recent treatment for mental illness including psychiatric treatment more intensive than outpatient care. With these indications a Level II PASRR evaluation must be completed prior to admission, unless the individual meets the definition of hospital discharge exemption. Resident #97 was admitted to the facility under the 30-day hospital discharge exemption. The exemption stated, if the individual's stay is anticipated to exceed 30 days, the NF (Nursing Facility) must…

    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 · D2022-07-08 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility did not ensure one (Resident #99) of 32 residents reviewed, received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice related to a change in condition, assessment, and following physician orders. Findings included: An observation of Resident #99 was made on 7/6/22 at 2:44 p.m. The resident was lying in bed with her eyes closed. She had steri-strips on her left hand and a scabbed over wound on the right side of her nose. A review of admission records indicated Resident #99 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including type II DM, unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance, psychotic disorder with hallucinations due to known physiological condition, and anxiety. A review of Resident #99's orders indicated an order dated 3/5/22 for head-to-toe skin checks weekly with special instructions to complete non-pressure observations or wound management form if appropriate. A review of Resident #99's Minimum Data Set (MDS)…

    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 · D2022-07-08 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure one (Resident #97) of four residents reviewed for nutrition services was monitored for weight change and intake at meals. Resident #97 was noted to have lost 37 lbs., a 14% weight loss, over a two-month period, even though he was not on a physician ordered weight loss program. Findings included: A review of Resident #97's electronic medical record revealed the resident weighed 256 pounds (lbs.) on 4/4/2022 and 219 lbs. on 6/9/22. This was a weight loss of 37 lbs., calculated to be a 14.45% weight loss in 2 months, which the facility's policy identified as severe. According to the facility's policy titled Weighting and Measuring Height Policy Resident, dated 3/22/22, a loss of 7.5% or greater is described as a severe weight loss. A review of admission records indicated Resident #97 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including adult failure to thrive, acute kidney failure, hyperosmolality and hypernatremia, dysphagia,…

    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 · D2022-07-08 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility did not ensure post dialysis care was provided for two (Resident #30 and #7) of two residents reviewed for dialysis Findings included: During a facility tour on 07/06/22 10:14 AM, Resident #30 was observed in his room being assisted by a staff member. Resident #30 was preparing to leave for dialysis. An attempt to interview the resident was not successful. Resident #30 was not easily understood but responded to yes and no questions. When asked if he had a snack or lunch packed for later, Resident #30 stated he did. Review of Resident #30's electronic medical record (EMR) showed the resident is [AGE] years old and was admitted to the facility on an 04/14/22 with diagnosis to include chronic kidney disease, unspecified. Review of physician orders for Resident #30 dated 04/14/22 - 07/07/22 showed: Medications administered prior to dialysis as ordered by physician. Receives dialysis at [name of facility] on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at 11:15 a.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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2021-03-12 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, staff interview, and facility record review, the facility failed to ensure resident medications were stored and supervised in a manner that was free from access to other residents during one (3/11/2021) of four days observed, and on one (East wing) of two units. It was observed that loose pills and capsules were placed visibly in the space between the wall and the back of the handrail on a main hallway. Findings included: On 3/11/2021 at 1:00 p.m., the 200 East hallway was observed during the lunch meal service. While standing in the main hallway, between resident rooms [ROOM NUMBERS], the space between the wall and the back of the handrail was observed with loose pills and capsules. Further observations revealed one orange round tablet, one white round tablet, and one large white capsule. The medications were easily visible from the hallway and could easily be accessed by anyone who walked by. This area was observed with high traffic of both residents and staff members. There were three…

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

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

Fines & penalties

$22,231 in federal fines across 4 penalties.

  • $4,587 — penalty dated 2023-10-02
  • $11,645 — penalty dated 2023-09-11
  • $3,176 — penalty dated 2023-08-28
  • $2,823 — penalty dated 2023-08-21

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 HARBORVIEW HEALTH SYSTEMS — 22 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 51.9+1.1 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.1+0.9 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 52.4+0.6 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 52.3+0.7 vs chain
The other 21 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
HARBORVIEW PENINSULA HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 07/15/2024
CL 2022 IRRV TROrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 07/15/2024
DE 2021 IRRV TROrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 07/15/2024
FL 7 NURSING AND REHAB HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 07/15/2024
STEFFY, SPENCERIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/15/2024
TARIQ, MARIUMIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/15/2024
LEIBOWITZ, CHAIMIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/15/2024
DAHAN, MICHELLEIndividualTRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 07/15/2024
ENGLANDER, SHMUELIndividualTRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 07/15/2024
KLEIN, JOSEPHIndividualTRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 07/15/2024
LEIBOWITZ, ELIYAHUIndividualTRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 07/15/2024
SOKOLOFF, RIVKAIndividualTRUSTEE OF THE SNFsince 07/15/2024

CMS files one row per role, so the 17 rows in the source record cover these 12 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.

$10.0M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-28.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.9M
Related-party expense15% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 79%Medicare 9%Other / private 12%

About 79% 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 $1.9M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 15% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

Cost & finances

$405per resident / day
operating cost
$12,303per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$315per 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 105451. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-09-19, 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