Palm Garden Of West Palm Beach

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.

52.9% 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 186 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 60.4% 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 91 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 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 38% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 25% 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 176 beds and averages 149.7 residents a day — about 85% occupied, or roughly 26 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 3.53 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.56 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.15 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 3.22 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.65 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.60 to 0.44 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 38% 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

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

20 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 9 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · J2025-04-24 · 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 record review, interview, policy review, and surveillance camera review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's advance directive choices were honored for a resident's expressed wishes for a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) order for 1 of 4 sampled residents reviewed for DNR status (Resident #1). The deficient practice caused Resident #1 to have likely suffered serious psychological harm by the facility's attempt to be resuscitated against his wishes. Resident #1 could not express his reaction to this event; therefore, the reasonable person concept was applied. Additionally, there was a likelihood that Resident #1 experienced severe physical pain; broken ribs; broken sternum and bleeding in the chest area from the resuscitation efforts (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38206442/). The facility staff did not follow their procedure to verify code status prior to initiating CPR. These actions resulted in the identification of Immediate Jeopardy. The facility administrator was informed of the Immediate Jeopardy…

  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 · D2025-12-29 · 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 reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure care and services to prevent pressure ulcers, as evidenced by no interventions ordered or in place to prevent, 1 of 3 sampled residents, Resident #3, from acquiring pressure ulcers. The findings included:Record review revealed Resident #3 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the admission assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #3 had redness to her buttocks area. Review of the quarterly minimum data set assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #3 was dependent on staff for toileting and required moderate assistance for turning right to left in bed.Review of the physician orders for Resident #3 did not reveal any orders to prevent skin breakdown.Review of a skin assessment dated [DATE] documented Resident #3 had an open wound to her sacrum and left buttocks.Review of a progress note dated 04/25/25 revealed documentation that staff called Resident #3's daughter to inform her of an open area and redness to the resident's…

  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 · D2024-04-18 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to accurately assess 2 of 33 sampled residents. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was inaccurate related to indwelling urinary catheter use for Resident #79 and related to the discharge status for Resident #141. The findings included: 1. Review of the record revealed Resident #79 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a return to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the admission progress note on 03/15/24 at 8:48 AM documented the resident was readmitted to the facility with a Foley catheter (indwelling urinary catheter) in place. Additional progress notes, to include those on 03/25/24, 04/01/24, and 04/03/24, all referred to the use of the indwelling urinary catheter. An observation on 04/15/24 at 12:32 PM revealed Resident #79 in bed. An indwelling urinary catheter bag was noted to bedside drainage. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments dated 03/21/24 lacked the documented use of the indwelling urinary catheter.…

  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 · D2024-04-18 · 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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for 1 of 1 sampled resident reviewed with an indwelling urinary catheter (Resident #79). The findings included: 1. Review of the record revealed Resident #79 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a return to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the admission progress note on 03/15/24 at 8:48 AM documented the resident was readmitted to the facility with a Foley (indwelling urinary catheter) in place. Additional progress notes, to include those on 03/25/24, 04/01/24, and 04/03/24, all referred to the use of the indwelling urinary catheter. An observation on 04/15/24 at 12:32 PM revealed Resident #79 in bed. An indwelling urinary catheter bag was noted to bedside drainage. Review of the current care plans lacked any care plans related to the use of the indwelling urinary catheter. During an interview on 04/18/24 at 11:00 AM, Staff D, Minimum Data Set (MDS) Coordinator, agreed with the lack of a care plan…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-04-18 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure ordered labs were completed timely for 1 of 5 sampled residents, Resident #194. The findings included: Review of the record revealed Resident #194 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], after a hospitalization for a hip replacement. Review of the record revealed a physician order dated 04/05/24, for a Complete Blood Count (CBC) and a Basic Metabolic Panel (BMP) to be drawn on 04/06/24. Review of the record revealed a CBC was collected on 04/08/24. The record lacked a BMP on or about 04/06/24. Review of the progress notes lacked any documentation related to the failure to obtain the CBC on 04/06/24 as ordered, the reason for the late collection on 04/08/24, and or the failure to obtain the BMP. An additional order dated 04/16/24 at 8: 23 AM ordered a CBC, CMP (comprehensive metabolic panel), and BMP for a follow up. The record revealed intravenous fluids were ordered on 04/17/24 at 4:27 PM for dehydration, and a progress note revealed the fluids…

  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 · Dcited before2024-04-18 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure accurate and complete resident records for 4 of 33 sampled residents, as evidenced by: the record for Resident #79 lacked an order for the indwelling urinary catheter; the record for Resident #36 lacked documentation related to a change in a code status; the record for Resident #57 had inaccurate documentation related to a dressing change; and the record for Resident #92 lacked documentation related to blood sugar monitoring. The findings included: 1. Review of the record revealed Resident #79 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a return to the facility on [DATE]. Review of the admission progress note on [DATE] at 8:48 AM documented the resident was readmitted to the facility with a Foley catheter (indwelling urinary catheter) in place. Additional progress notes, to include those on [DATE], [DATE], and [DATE], all referred to the use of the indwelling urinary catheter. An observation on [DATE] at 12:32 PM revealed Resident…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-01-26 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
  Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to meet the needs and requests of residents to reasonably accommodate the residents needs for 4 of 4 sampled residents (Residents #81, #22, #81 and #79), as evidenced by failure of answer call lights timely, provide additional assistance, and unable to locate a staff member to assist residents. The findings included: 1. Record review revealed Resident #81 was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The Annual minimum data set (MDS) assessment, reference date 12/07/22, recorded a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score of 15, indicated Resident #81 was cognitively intact, and had no cognition impairment. The annual minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated Resident #81 required supervision with bed mobility, limited assistance with transfer, supervision with locomotion on and off unit, extensive assistance with dressing, independent with eating, limited assistance toilet use and personal hygiene. On 01/23/23 at 9:50 AM, an interview was held with…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-01-26 · 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 reviews, the facility failed to ensure 6 of 28 sampled residents reviewed received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice and the residents' comprehensive person-centered care plans as evidenced by the following: 1. Failure to provide barrier cream as ordered, and failure to conduct skin checks per facility protocol (Resident #20); 2. Failure to provide barrier cream, heel prep, and prescribed topical cream as ordered; failure to conduct skin checks per facility protocol (Resident #90); 3. Failure to conduct skin checks per protocol for Resident #59; 4. Failure to apply ordered geri-sleeves each day for Resident #98; 5. Failure to apply ordered hand split for Resident #107; and 6. Failure to provide medications as ordered for Resident #31. The findings included: A review of the facility policy, titled, Skin Care and Wound Management, effective October 2014, Revised July 2017 stated in part: Page 4. The Skin Grid-Other will be…

  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 · D2023-01-26 · 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

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to complete Dialysis Center Communication care forms for 4 of 4 sampled residents reviewed for dialysis, Residents #30, #118, #96 and #66. The findings included: The facility form, titled, Dialysis-Palm Garden Communication Form, is used for the residents who are leaving the facility for dialysis treatment. There is an A, B and C section located on the form. The facility nurse is to complete Section A of the form prior to the resident(s) leaving the facility for dialysis. Section B is filled out by the Dialysis Nurse and Section C is filled out by the facility nurse when the resident returns to the facility. The documentation for Section A is to include departure time, vital signs, last blood sugar if insulin dependent, last weight, date of last weight, dietary concerns, if the resident had wounds, medications given prior to dialysis and special instructions or information. There is a section for a signature and date. The documentation in Section C is to include the time the resident returned to the facility, post dialysis…

  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 · D2023-01-26 · 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

  Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the narcotic reconciliation was accurate for 2 of 6 sampled resident, Residents #28 and #31. The findings included: On 01/25/23 at 1:05 PM, a medication storage observation was conducted with Staff B, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). The observation was conducted on the second floor Cart #1. A random narcotic count was done. Resident #28 was ordered Oxycodone HCL 5 mg tablets to be given every 6 hours for pain, as needed. The document, titled, Controlled Medication Utilization Record, was reviewed for Resident #28. The Controlled Medication Utilization record documented the time medication was removed from the narcotic storage. The Medication Administration Record (MAR) was reviewed. The MAR documented the time the removed narcotic was administered to the resident. On 12/13/22 at 12:55 PM, on 12/16/22 at 3:45 PM and on 01/20/23 with (no time recorded) the resident's medication Oxycodone 5 mg was removed from the narcotic storage and the MAR failed to provide evidence the medication was administered to the resident.…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2023-01-26 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
  Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
  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, policy review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the medication review recommendations by the consultant pharmacist were addressed by the prescribing physician for 1 of 5 sampled resident reviewed for unnecessary medications. (Resident (#59) The findings included: A review of the facility policy, titled, Medication Regimen Review (MRR), effective date 12/01/07 and last revised 03/03/20, stated, in part, the following: 7. Facility should encourage Physician/Prescriber or other responsible parties receiving the MRR and the Director of Nursing (DON) to act upon the recommendations contained in the MRR. 7.1 For those issues that require Physician/Prescriber intervention, the facility should encourage Physician/Prescriber to either accept and act upon the recommendations contained within the MRR or reject all or some of the recommendations contained in the MRR and provide an explanation as to why the recommendation was rejected. 7.2 The attending physician should document 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.

  Pharmacy Service 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

$16,153 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $16,153 — penalty dated 2025-04-24

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 PALM GARDEN HEALTH AND REHABILITATION — 14 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 18 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

7 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.

This home reported $3.6M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 22% 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