Darcy Hall Of Life Care

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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.

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.

36.2% 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 39 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 68.3% 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 41 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 0.12 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 9% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 9% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 220 beds and averages 181.5 residents a day — about 82% occupied, or roughly 38 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.93 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.87 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.44 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 3.53 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.09 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.97 to 0.62 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 27% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

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.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

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

28 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 16 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-09-05 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, observations, record and policy review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from neglect by failing to provide necessary supervision to prevent the likelihood of serious injury, harm, impairment, or death by allowing an elopement for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for an elopement. The facility failed to ensure effective measures were in place to prevent the elopement in both the secured unit and the exit from the building.The deficient practice allowed Resident #1 to exit the facility undetected on 08/30/25 at 4:23 PM. There were 182 residents in the facility at the time of the survey. The facility's Administrator was notified of Immediate Jeopardy and given the IJ Template on 09/04/25 at 3:05 PM. The immediate jeopardy was removed on 09/04/25 at 4:45 PM, and the deficiency was lowered to a scope and severity of D, isolated, no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is not immediate jeopardy. Cross reference to F689.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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Immediate jeopardy · J2025-09-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, observation, record and policy review, the facility failed to provide necessary supervision to prevent the likelihood of serious injury, harm, impairment, or death by allowing an elopement for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #1) reviewed for an elopement. The facility failed to ensure effective measures were in place to prevent the elopement in both the secured unit and the exit from the building.The deficient practice allowed Resident #1 to exit the facility undetected on 08/30/25 at 4:23 PM. There were 182 residents in the facility at the time of the survey. The facility's Administrator was notified of Immediate Jeopardy and given the IJ Template on 09/04/25 at 3:05 PM. The immediate jeopardy was removed on 09/04/25 at 4:45 PM and the deficiency was lowered to a scope and severity of D, isolated, no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is not immediate jeopardy. Cross reference to F600.The findings included:A review of the facility's policy titled, Missing…

  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 · D2026-03-18 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure an effective infection prevention and control program to help prevent the development and transmission of the communicable disease scabies, as evidenced by the failure to ensure documented evidence of the provision of ivermectin, a medication to treat scabies, and ensure dermatological appointment for Resident #1; failure to initiate timely contact precautions for 3 of 11 sampled residents (Residents #8, #5, and #2); failure to ensure an effective Infection Control Surveillance plan as evidenced by the failure to log 7 of 10 sampled residents who presented with a rash and were reported to the State Agency in October 2025 (Residents #1, #7, #9, #10, #11, #12, and #13), and 2 of 2 sampled residents in November 2025 (Residents #2 and # 8); failure to ensure appropriate housekeeping and laundry services for residents affected with and or treated for scabies for 1 of 6 units affected (West Unit); and failure to ensure staff education in November 2025…

  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 · D2026-02-24 · 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to promote healing of a facility acquired pressure ulcer for 1 of 3 sampled residents (Resident #1).The findings included: Record review revealed Resident #1 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE], with multiple readmissions, with a diagnosis that included Dementia. A review of a comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] documented that the resident had severe cognitive impairment and required total assistance with all activities of daily living. The assessment further documented Resident #1 had weight loss, two stage 3 pressure ulcers and was always incontinent of bladder and bowel.Record review revealed Resident #1 was care planned for at risk for break in skin integrity, dated 10/22/19. Interventions included clean and dry skin after each incontinent episode, turn and reposition frequently, and a low air loss mattress.Record review revealed Resident #1 was care planned for a left buttock and sacral pressure ulcer, dated 01/11/26. Interventions…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-09 · 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 interviews and clinical and administrative record review, the facility failed to ensure the necessary care and services were provided for 1 of 2 sampled residents, (Resident # 2), reviewed for medical appointments and/or medical procedures, as evidenced by the facility's failure to provide the necessary nursing supervision during transport to medical procedure for an incapacitated resident; and failed to ensure the health care surrogate was fully informed and adhered to preferences voiced or informed when changes are made prior to implementation. The findings included: Review of the clinical record for Resident #2, revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA), Hypertension (HTN), Diabetes Mellitus (DM), Dysphagia following cerebral infarction, Epilepsy and expressive aphasia. Review of the Significant Change MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident had a BIMS (Brief Interview of Mental Status) score…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-30 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to honor a resident's choices related to showers for 1 of 3 sampled residents reviewed for choices (Resident #16). The findings included: A review of Resident #16's medical records revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses to include Hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body) and Hemiparesis (one-sided muscle weakness) following a Cerebral Infarction (stroke), affecting the right dominant side, Muscle Weakness and Diabetes. A review of Resident #16's Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set) assessment documented her BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) score as a 9, indicating moderate impaired cognition. The assessment (Section GG) documented Resident #16 is dependent on showers/bathing and she has upper and lower impairment on one side of her body. A review of care plans documented Resident #16 requires assistance by staff with showering and bathing. During an interview on 01/28/25 at 12:31 PM, Resident #16 was asked if she…

  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 before2025-01-30 · 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to document an accurate Advance Directive care plan for 1 of 39 sampled records reviewed (Resident #121). The findings concluded: Record review revealed Resident #121 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] documented the resident had severe cognitive impairment and was dependent for activities of daily living (ADL). The assessment further documented the resident was receiving hospice services. A review of Resident #121's care plan revealed a care plan dated [DATE] that documented the resident had an Advance Directive for CPR (Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation) and was a full code (a medical term that indicates a resident's preference for resuscitation and all life saving measures during a medical emergency). A review of Resident #121's orders revealed an order dated [DATE] for DNR (Do Not Resuscitate). Further review of Resident #121's records revealed a State of Florida DNR order form dated [DATE]. An interview was…

  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 · D2025-01-30 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolated
  Ensure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is a medical reason.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide proper care and treatment, as evidenced by not providing a communication board, to maintain the resident's communication abilities for 1 of 1 sampled resident, Resident #75, reviewed for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs). The findings included: Record review revealed Resident #75 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was admitted to Hospice Services on 08/02/24 with diagnoses that included Anxiety Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, Persistent Mood Disorder, Panic Disorder, and Dementia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) quarterly assessment dated [DATE] documented the resident needed or wanted an interpreter to communicate with a doctor or health care staff. Resident #75 was dependent on assistance with activities of daily living which included care for incontinence. Review of Resident #75's care plans noted that she had a communication problem. The intervention for the communication problem since 05/21/23…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-30 · 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 2) Review of the record revealed Resident #45 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the current physician orders revealed the resident was prescribed two medications for high blood pressure, to include Amlodipine 2.5 mg (milligrams) once daily, and Lisinopril 10 mg once daily. Resident #45 was also prescribed Carvedilol 6.25 mg twice daily for Coronary Artery Disease. Further review of the orders lacked any type of blood pressure or heart rate parameters for holding any of the three medications. Review of the current January 2025 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed all three medications were held on 01/06/25 for the 9 AM dose because of the resident's heart rate of 55 beats per minute. The Carvedilol was held on 01/17/25 for the 5 PM dose, with a corresponding progress note that documented, hold per BP (blood pressure) value. The documented blood pressure for that administration was 124/59. Review of the December 2024 MAR revealed all three of the above mentioned medications were held 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 · D2025-01-30 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
  Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to discard narcotics/controlled medications in a timely manner for 2 of 8 sampled residents (Resident #64 and #124); and failed to reconcile narcotics, as evidenced by not documenting the medication administration on the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for 2 of 8 sampled residents (Resident #124 and #263). The findings included: A review of the facility's policy titled, Administration of Medication, last reviewed on 09/16/24, documented: Medication administration should be documented timely following the administration to the resident. 1. Record review revealed Resident #64 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A medication storage observation was conducted with Staff A, a Licensed Practical Nurse, of the Northwest medication cart on 01/29/25 at 4:00 PM. The observation revealed 6 medication packs of Lorazepam (anti-anxiety medication) for Resident #64 as follows: a. A medication pack of 3 pills of Lorazepam 0.5 mg. The pack was received 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-30 · 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

  Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure safe medication storage for 1 of 8 medications carts (D Unit) and 1 of 3 treatment carts (West Unit), as evidenced by these carts being left unlocked and unattended, with independently ambulatory residents noted. The findings included: 1) On 01/27/25 at 9:54 AM, the medication cart on the D Unit was observed unattended and the push in lock was not engaged. The lock was easily pulled out and the medication cart drawers were easily opened. The medication cart was filled with medications for the 22 residents residing on the D Unit along with the generic stock medications. While awaiting the arrival of a staff member, Resident #100 was observed independently ambulating in the hallway in front of the medication cart. There were no staff observed in the hallway of the D Unit. A few minutes later the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON) came to the medication cart and agreed with the concern of the unlocked medication cart. On 01/27/25 at 9:58 AM, Staff A, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), returned to the medication cart 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-01-30 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility failed to provide food in a puree form to meet the individual needs of residents for 3 of 17sampled residents (Resident #48, Resident #46, Resident #65) on a medically ordered pureed diet. The findings include: Review of the facility's Life Care Centers of America Policy, reviewed on 5/01/2024, documented the Pureed diet consists of foods that are easy to swallow because they are blended, whipped, or mashed until they are pudding-like texture. All foods on this diet should be smooth and free of lumps. (National Dysphagia Definition). The purpose of the pureed diet is designed to minimize the amount of chewing required and to facilitate the ease of swallowing food. This diet is designed for residents who have moderate to severe dysphagia, with poor oral phase abilities and reduced ability to protect their airway. 1). Record review revealed Resident #46's active diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease, and Dementia. A review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) Quarterly assessment dated [DATE], documented…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

$30,924 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $30,924 — penalty dated 2025-09-05

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 LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA — 194 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 25 rows in the source record cover these 15 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.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

About 85% 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 $3.0M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

Cost & finances

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