611 S 13th St., Fort Pierce, FL 34950 · St. Lucie County · (772) 464-5262
171 certified beds, about 124 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1972
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 105257 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on March 20, 2025, inspectors cited 22 health deficiencies (the Florida average is 7.1, the national average 9.2).
Of 66 health citations since July 2022, 3 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (3 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $65,361 in the last three years; the largest was $55,322, and the latest is dated November 1, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.82 hours per resident per day, against 3.82 across Florida and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.83 of those hours.
37.0% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Florida average 41.4%).
CMS links it to Aviata Health Group, an affiliated group of 50 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 66 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review and interviews the facility failed to ensure the resident was treated with respect and dignity related to going into the resident's room without his permission and removing his personal possessions from his room for 1 of 3 sampled resident (Resident #2).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure the physician completes the initial assessment within 30 days of admission for 3 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident #1, Resident #7 and Resident #8).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical and administrative record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that residents receive the necessary treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice. This is evidenced by the facility failing to follow the prescribed monitoring, administration and accurate documentation for 2 of 6 sampled residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical and administrative record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the staff take appropriate action (e.g., suspending administration of the anticoagulant) in response to an elevated International Normalized Ratio (INR) for a resident who is receiving warfarin, resulting in the future hospitalization of the resident. The staff failed to respond appropriately to an INR level that is above the target range for treatment. The staff failed to ensure the prescribed laboratory monitoring was conducted and/or provided evidence that follow-up is performed when not done. This failure affected 1 of 1 resident prescribed warfarin therapy (Resident # 1).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide care and services for showers, as evidenced by failing to provide documented evidence for proof of showering for 1 of 3 sampled residents who were reviewed for shower service, (Resident # 4).
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and records review, the facility failed to ensure pain medication was administered as ordered by the physician, as evidenced by failure to ensure pain medication was documented as administered, nurse refusal to provide pain medication and failure to provide documented evidence of appropriate training and education to the nurses following the incident for 1 of 3 sampled residents reviewed, (Resident # 5).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, and observation, the facility failed to implement transmission based precautions related to suspected C-DIFF (a contagious intestinal infection) for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for diarrhea (Resident #83); Failed to follow infection control standards during medication administration observation for 3 of 6 sampled residents (Residents #193, #10, and #65); and failed to maintain laundry in a manner to prevent spread of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide showers as per schedule and resident request for 1 of 6 sampled residents, Resident #2.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the Facility failed to notify the family in a timely manner that Medicare Part A was going to be ending for 1 of 3 residents reviewed, Resident #87.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews, the facility failed to provide personal privacy which includes his personal space, accommodation and personal care related to the bedroom door not closing for 3 of 3 sampled residents (Residents #242, #64, and #76).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment related to the discharge and transfer of Resident #139; Limited range of motion for Resident #5; Unnecessary medication for Resident #107 and Resident #64; and medication inaccuracy related to anticoagulant use for Resident #32.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to obtain a PASARR (Preadmission Screening for individuals with a mental disorder and individuals with intellectual disability) Level II in a timely manner for 1 of 2 Residents reviewed for PASARRs (Resident #86).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that baseline care plans are completed within 48 hours of admission for 3 of 38 residents reviewed (Resident #32, #117 and #103).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to offer and provide services of dental care and getting resident out of bed at his request for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for ADL's (Activities of Daily Living), Resident #32.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to encourage and assist the residents to participate in Activities for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for Activities. (Resident #32 and Resident #243).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to follow physician's orders related to blood pressure medication, for Resident #103, thyroid medication for Resident #242, spasm medication for Resident #66 and lab orders for stool sample for C-Diff for Resident #83.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a physician ordered urology appointment in a timely manner for 1 of 1 sampled resident, Resident #60, who had a suprapubic (located in the lower abdomen) urinary catheter.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to maintain a nutritional status for a resident receiving dialysis therapy related to ordered nutritional supplement for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for Dialysis (Resident #25).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure care and service for oxygen therapy for 3 of 5 sampled residents, as evidenced by the failure to properly store the nebulizer mask for Resident #37, failure to ensure physician order for oxygen use for Resident #192, and failure to follow physician orders for the amount of oxygen used for Resident #117.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure pain medication was administered as ordered for one of three residents reviewed, Resident #109.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure dialysis communication forms were completed, and Hemodialysis Dietitian Recommendations were carried out in a timely manner for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for hemodialysis (Resident #25).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) was assessed, and the care plan was individualized for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for PTSD (Resident #91).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure there was sufficient staff to upload physician progress notes in a timely manner for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for diarrhea (Resident #83), and failed to ensure a urology consult was obtained in a timely manner for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #60).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure narcotic removal was documented in the medication administration records (MARs) for 3 of 9 residents reviewed during the medication storage review process. This involved Residents #39, # 69 and #71.
Inspectors wroteBased on Record review and interview the facility failed to ensure adequate monitoring of side effects and behaviors for psychotropic medications for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications, Resident #103. Resident #103 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include Generalized Anxiety, Major Depressive Disorder, Bipolar Disorder, Schizoaffective Disorder and Diabetes Mellitus. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the medication error rate was 14.81 percent. Four medication errors were identified while observing a total of 27 opportunities, affecting 1 of 7 residents observed (Resident #193).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper storage of medications for 1 of 5 residents during the medication pass observation (Resident #193,) and for 1 of 1 random sampled resident whose medications were observed at his bedside (Resident #242)
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to have a complete resident record for 5 of 28 sampled residents (Residents #83, #64, #37, #60, and #79).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and interview, the facility failed to provide evidence that the staff provided care and services that met professional standards of quality as evidenced by the staff failure to follow the physician orders for medication administration for 8 of 12 residents reviewed (Residents #7, #8, #9, #11, #12, #13, #14, #15).
Inspectors wroteBased on clinical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to provide evidence of providing the necessary care and services consistent with the prescribed treatment plan of care for 2 of 12 sampled residents (Resident # 8 and # 9). The staff failed to provide evidence they performed the prescribed treatments for tracheostomy care, wound care, catheter care, skin checks, oral care, and the PICC (Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter) dressing changes and monitoring.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, clinical record review and staff interview, the facility staff failed to provide the necessary care and services to maintain the oral hygiene of a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living, for 1 of 12 residents reviewed (Resident #9).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, clinical record review and policy review, the facility failed to ensure that 1 of 1 residents reviewed for intravenous medications (Resident #8) received the necessary care and services consistent with professional standards of practice. This is evidenced by the staff failing to complete the PICC (Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter) line dressing for multiple weeks.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to protect the residents' rights to be free from neglect for newly admitted residents requiring dialysis treatments. The facility failed to ensure a newly admitted resident received dialysis services in a timely manner causing the resident to be transferred to a higher level of care, affecting 1 of 3 residents reviewed for dialysis (Resident #1). The facility failed to ensure resident rights to prevent neglect regarding care and services for dialysis communication for newly admitted residents, resulting in serious harm and possibly the death of the resident (Resident #1). Upon admission to the hospital emergency department, Resident #1 was discovered to have a critically high serum potassium level, which could lead to hear problems including arrhythmia, heart attack, and death. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure newly admitted residents received dialysis services in a timely manner causing one resident to be transferred to a higher level of care, affecting 1 of 3 residents reviewed for dialysis (Resident #1). The facility failed to ensure resident rights to prevent neglect regarding care and services for dialysis communication for newly admitted residents, resulting in serious harm and possibly the death of the resident (Resident #1). Upon admission to the hospital emergency department, Resident #1 was discovered to have a critically high serum potassium level, which could lead to heart problems including arrhythmia, heart attack, and death. On 10/31/24, it was determined that the findings of the survey posed Immediate Jeopardy to the health and safety of the dialysis residents residing in the facility. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews, the facility failed to honor the resident's right for food preference for portion sizes for 2 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #1 and #4).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, administrative record review and interviews, the facility failed to store, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This is evidence by the facility serving and storing milk beyond the manufacturer's expiration date. This failure affected 1 of 4 sampled residents who have a preference for chocolate milk for three or more days (Resident #5).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and properly functioning wanderguard doors (wander monitoring system device) for 1 of 3 sampled residents reviewed for elopement risk (exiting the facility unsupervised) (Resident #1). The deficient practice allowed Resident #1 to exit the facility undetected on 03/27/24 at approximately 6:00 PM and walk 1.4 miles away from the facility. Resident #1 was found by the police while displaying confusion, resulting in a transfer to a local hospital. These actions resulted in Immediate Jeopardy. The facility administrator was informed of the Immediate Jeopardy on 04/10/24 at 4:48 PM. At the time of the investigation there were 11 residents who were identified as wander/elopement risk.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to accurately assess a resident for wandering for 1 of 3 sampled residents reviewed for elopement (Resident #1).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews, the facility failed to provide food service in a manner consistent with professional standards for food safety.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to treat 3 of 29 sampled residents and additional Resident Council members, in a dignified manner, related to staff attitudes and manner in which personal care is provided, speaking in foreign languages in front of residents, response to call bells, not addressing residents by their proper name and use of hospital armbands (Resident #31, #43, #85, and voiced concerns during Resident Council, including Resident #6, #41 and #7).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews, the facility failed to provide a clean, comfortable, and home like environment for the residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure of a resident's ability to to use an overhead light for 1 of 1 sampled residents observed (Resident #31).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure 2 of 4 sampled residents were free from abuse and neglect, as evidenced by a resident-to-resident altercation between Resident #87 and #45, resulting in physical harm to Resident #87.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to report to the State Survey Agency 2 of 3 allegations of abuse, within two hours. Resident #43 voiced an allegation of abuse by a staff member. Residents #45 and #87 were involved in a resident-to-resident altercation.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the facility failed to protect 1 of 4 sampled residents from further abuse, after a voiced allegation by Resident #43, of alleged abuse by Staff E, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). The facility also failed to ensure a thorough investigation for 2 of 4 sampled residents involved in a resident-to-resident altercation (Residents #45 and #87).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to accurately complete the quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for 2 of 5 sampled residents reviewed for Unnecessary Medications (Resident #83, as it relates to missing diagnosis of Depression; and Resident #71, as it relates to missing diagnosis of Anxiety).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, policy, and staff interview, the Facility failed to complete a Level II PASARR for 1 of 1 sampled resident reviewed with diagnosis of severe mental illness (Resident #77).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to review and revise comprehensive, personalized care plan related to the diagnosis of Depression and use of antidepressant medication therapy for 1 of 5 sampled residents reviewed for Unnecessary Medications (Resident #83).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to provide enteral feeding as ordered by the physician for 1 of 1 sampled residents reviewed for Tube feeding (Resident #58).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the medication error rate was 11.11 percent. Three medication errors were identified while observing a total of 27 opportunities, affecting 3 of 8 sampled residents observed during medication administration observations (Residents #65, #31, and #14).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure proper storage of medications in the treatment cart for 1 of 1 sampled resident observed for wound care (Resident #21). This observation was made on the [NAME] Unit were 7 of 22 residents were identified and/or observed to independently ambulate or self-propel throughout the unit, to include sampled Resident #65, #45, #28, #84 and #69. The facility also failed to ensure expired medications were removed from 2 of 6 medication carts (Emerald cart #3 and [NAME] A/front cart).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, and review of the respiratory services contract, the facility failed to maintain accurate and complete records for 3 of 33 sampled residents, related to respiratory services for Resident #1, a fall for Resident #43, and a newly identified skin impairment for Resident #28. The facility also failed to ensure all progress notes completed by the Nurse Practitioner (NP) for the Medical Director were maintained in the medical records.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure collection of urinalysis for 1 of 1 sampled resident, prior to initiation of an antibiotic (Resident #31).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to respond and resolve grievances in a timely manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and home like environment, for multiple residents in the facility. The census at the time of the survey was 94 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure point of care staff were part of an interdisciplinary team (IDT) that participated in the care planning review and revision for 22 of 32 sampled residents reviewed for care plans (Resident #34, 57, 82, 94, 23, 7, 89, 54, 33, 9, 66, 1, 44, 58, 63, 74, 81, 87, 24, 37, 84 and 3).
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to provide an environment free of accident hazards with the potential to affect residents that use the shower room on the Emerald Unit who are independently ambulatory; failed to secure the soiled utility room and storage room; failed to maintain the door to room [ROOM NUMBER] in order for residents to exit the room in case of an emergency; and the facility failed to accurately assess a resident post-fall for 1 of 1 sampled resident reviewed for falls, Resident #58.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facilitiy failed to ensure appropriate staffing levels to provide appropriate care and services, as evidenced by unresolved grievances related to staffing identified by Resident Council, numerous complaints by residents during the survey and resident falls. This has the potential to affect the entire resident population. The census at the time of the survey was 94 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation interview and record review, the faciity failed to provide prepared foods, stored and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement appropriate plans of actions to correct identified quality concerns especially related to pest control.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program in order to maintain an environment free from pests
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide opportunities for a resident to be out of bed for 1 of 3 samples residents reviewed (Resident #57).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to implement and develop care plan for Diabetes for 1 out of 5 sampled residents reviewed for unnecessary medications Resident #58; and failure to implement an ADL (Activities of Daily Living) care plan for Resident #74 for 1 of 4 sampled residents reviewed for ADL's.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to follow physician orders for wound care treatment for 1 of 3 sampled residents reviewed for wound care (Resident #66); the facility failed to follow physician orders for blood pressure medications for 1 of 5 sampled residents reviewed for unneccessary medications (Resident#33); and failure to follow physician orders for skin care treatment 1 of 4 sampled residents reviewed for ADL's. (Resident #74).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure proper positioning of indwelling catheter bag and failed to ensure appropriate hand hygiene technique during catheter care for 1 of 2 sampled residents reviewed with a history of urinary tract infection (UTI) (Resident #88).
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure accurate reconciliation of controlled medications for 2 of 4 sampled residents reviewed(Resident #68 and #200).
6 fire safety citations on file: 2 on March 20, 2025, 4 on November 17, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| November 1, 2024 | Fine | $55,322 |
| April 10, 2024 | Fine | $10,039 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Florida | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.82 | 3.82 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.83 | 0.73 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.58 | 3.49 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.39 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.60 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 37.0% | 41.4% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 48.4% | 46.0% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.58 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.91 on weekdays and 3.58 on weekends, 8% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.76 in April to June 2025 to 3.82 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.82 | 0.83 | 3.91 | 3.58 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 124 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.90 | 0.92 | 3.99 | 3.66 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 128 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.84 | 0.88 | 3.92 | 3.64 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 125 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.76 | 0.86 | 3.87 | 3.47 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 132 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Florida, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.76 | 0.70 | 3.90 | 3.44 | 1.1% | 0.2% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Florida, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.03 | $17.33 to $20.34 | 96,960 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $29.70 | $28.14 to $31.11 | 38,620 |
| Registered nurses | $40.48 | $37.82 to $48.64 | 229,940 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Florida | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 9.5 | 8.7 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.7 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.0 | 2.5 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.9 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 9.1 | 9.5 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.5 | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.9 | 8.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 24.9 | 26.1 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 13.9 | 9.1 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.4 | 2.1 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Aviata at Saint Lucie's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it worse than the national rate (28.8% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
28.8% this home
Worse than the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Florida: 169 better, 109 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 28 eligible stays.
11.4% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Florida: 2 better, 35 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 47 eligible stays.
7.8% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Florida: 6 better, 21 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 36 eligible stays.
49.1% this home
Median of homes: Florida55.1% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 59 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Florida0.6% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 98 residents counted.
0.8% this home
Median of homes: Florida1.3% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 98 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Florida97.7% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 12 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: 13TH STREET OPCO LLC. CMS links this home to Aviata Health Group, a group of 50 nursing homes averaging 2.4 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13th Street Parent LLC | Direct ownership interest | Organization | 09/01/2023 | |
| Pierce Holdco LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 09/01/2023 | |
| Freund, Nochum | Corporate officer | Individual | 09/01/2023 | |
| Demons, Keith | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/01/2023 | |
| Freund, Nochum | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/01/2023 | |
| Watt, Jason | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/27/2025 | |
| Dagan, Amitai | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 06/30/2025 | |
| Goldberger, Abraham | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 06/30/2025 | |
| Goldberger, Faigy | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 06/30/2025 | |
| Herskowitz, Eliezer | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 07/02/2025 | |
| Herskowitz, Yaakov | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 07/03/2025 | |
| Travitsky, Aaron | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 07/03/2025 | |
| Aspire Mgt LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/01/2023 | |
| Demons, Keith | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/01/2023 | |
| Watt, Jason | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 03/27/2025 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Florida. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.