110 Kay Larkin Dr, Palatka, FL 32177 · Putnam County · (386) 325-0173
180 certified beds, about 151 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1989
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 105652 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 16, 2026, inspectors cited 12 health deficiencies (the Florida average is 7.1, the national average 9.2).
None of its 42 health citations since November 2023 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.58 hours per resident per day, against 3.82 across Florida and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.45 of those hours.
51.2% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Florida average 41.4%).
CMS links it to Summit Care, an affiliated group of 22 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 42 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were complete and accurate for 8 of 15 residents, Residents #2, #3, #8, #9, #112, #73, #139, and #153, reviewed Minimum Data Set assessments.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure wound care dressing changes were provided per physicians' orders for 4 of 7 residents, Resident #49, #58, #132, and #161 reviewed for skin conditions and failed to apply compression stockings per they physician order for 1 of 3 residents, Resident #150 reviewed for edema.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure medications were securely stored when unattended for 2 of 4 hallways.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed ensure residents' records were complete and accurate for 5 of 7 residents, Residents #49, #58, #132, #161, and #150, reviewed for documentation.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) and Level II PASRR were completed when a mental illness was identified for 2 of 3 residents, Resident #2 and #136, review for PASRR screening.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan for 1 of 3 residents, Resident #139, reviewed for behavioral management.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure the flushing of a gastric tube after the administration of a bolus feeding for 1of 4 residents, Resident #136, reviewed for enteral tube management.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure respiratory care for oxygen administration and/or humidification per physician orders for 2 of 6, Resident #48 and #147, and failed to obtain a physician order for the use of a continuous positive airway pressure machine for 1 of 3 residents, Resident #84, reviewed for respiratory services.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure physician orders were followed related to the pharmacy Psychoactive Medication Use Recommendations for the monthly drug regimen review for 1 of 5 residents, Resident #49, reviewed for unnecessary medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure laboratory specimens as ordered by the physician were collected for 2 of 4 residents, Resident #3 and #48, reviewed for laboratory services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to prevent the possible spread of infection during wound care and the administration of gastrointestinal tube feeding.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the residents' health record showed the residents either received the pneumococcal immunization for 1 of 5 residents, Resident #43 reviewed for immunization.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) dressing changes were performed in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 of 5 residents, Resident #2, reviewed for intravenous therapy.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident records were complete and accurately documented for wound care treatments 1 of 5 residents, Resident #1, reviewed for wound care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to prevent the possible spread of infection for not implementing enhanced barrier precautions for 1 of 3 residents, Resident #2, reviewed for intravenous therapy care.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to provide a rationale when actions were not taken for pharmacy recommendations for 3 (Resident #7, #84, and #99) of 5 residents review for unnecessary medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents were treated with dignity and respect and were free from physical restraint use when 1 resident had a splint on one hand and a nonskid sock covering the other hand for 1 resident (Resident #116) of 2 residents observed for positioning and mobility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure accuracy of minimum data set assessments for 1 (Resident #4) of 6 residents reviewed for respiratory services and 1 (Resident #143) of 5 reviewed for unnecessary medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on an interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for 1 (Resident #44) of 3 residents reviewed for urinary tract infections (UTI) , and for 1 resident (Resident #21) of 4 residents reviewed for mood and behaviors.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to administer blood pressure medication following parameters for 2 (Resident #103 and 143) out of 8 residents reviewed for medication administration and failed to follow professional standards of practice during medication administration to 1 resident, Resident #456.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility staff failed to ensure that oxygen was administered consistent with professional standards of practice for two (Resident #8 and Resident #125) of 6 residents reviewed for respiratory care .
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents' medications regimens were free of unnecessary antibiotic use based on adequate indications to reduce the risk of the developement of antibiotic resistant organisms for 1 (Resident #134) of 6 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure the drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored in accordance with currently accepted professional standards of practice when unsecured medications were observed in resident rooms for 1 out of 4 units reviewed for unattended medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to help prevent the transmission of communicable diseases and infection by failing to perform hand hygiene during medication administration for 4 (Residents #96 and #407) of 6 residents observed for medication administration, and failed to follow acceptable standards of care for storage of respiratory care equipment for 2 ( Resident #47 and Resident #143) of 6 residents reviewed for Respiratory care.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to implement its antibiotic stewardship protocol when it failed to monitor the use of antibiotics to reduce the risk of development of antibiotic resistance for 1 (Resident # 134) of 3 residents reviewed for urinary tract infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and review of policy and procedures, the facility failed to adhere to infection control practice standards during incontinence care for 2 out of 3 residents reviewed for incontinence care (Residents #5 and #6).
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a clean and homelike environment in 1 of 2 wings in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure comprehensive person-centered care plans were developed and implemented for 1 of 3 residents reviewed, Residents #5.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff used appropriate personal protective equipment while providing direct care to the residents on contact precautions to prevent the possible spread of infection and communicable diseases (Photographic evidence obtained).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents with newly evident or possible serious mental disorder, intellectual disability or related condition were referred to the appropriate state designated authority for 3 of 4 residents reviewed for mood and behaviors, Residents #53, #95, #142.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received respiratory care services consistent with professional standards of practice for 4 of 6 residents reviewed for respiratory care, Residents #123, #231, #104 and #142.
Inspectors wrote2. Review of Resident #147's physician order dated 9/12/2022 reads, Liberal Renal diet, Regular Texture, Thin consistency. Review of Resident #147's physician order dated 9/12/2023 reads, Dialysis: Vitals Signs Pre Dialysis every day shift every Mon, Wed, Fri for Dialysis. Review of Resident #147's physician order dated 9/12/2023 reads, Dialysis: Vitals Signs Post Dialysis every evening shift every Mon [Monday], Wed [Wednesday], Fri [Friday] for Dialysis. Review of Resident #147's physician order dated 9/12/2022 reads, Dialysis: AV Fistula- Monitor for Signs & Symptoms of Infection every shift. Assess site for any change in skin condition. Report any noted redness, edema, or increased skin temperature to MD every shift. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident choices or preferences were followed.
Inspectors wrote2. Review of Resident #20's admission record revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #20's medical records revealed the resident had a fall with injury on 10/3/2023. Resident #20 returned to the facility following a temporary absence for hospitalization on 10/9/2023 with a new diagnosis of fracture of left radius. Review of Resident #20's Minimum Data Set showed the resident's next assessment reference date of 10/16/2023 that was 18 days overdue. During an interview on 11/3/2023 at approximately 7:45 AM, the Director of Nursing stated, My expectation is that upon return to the facility, the assessment should be completed within 14 days. Review of the facility policy and procedure titled Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) last reviewed on 3/30/2023 reads, Intent: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the assessments accurately reflected the resident's status at the time of assessment for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for hospice services, Residents #27 and #41, and 1 of 4 residents reviewed for discharge, Resident #179.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop a person-centered care plan for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for hospice services, Resident #41, and 1 of 8 residents reviewed for nutrition, Resident #101.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards for wound care for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for skin conditions, Resident #4.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received restorative services as recommended by the physical therapist to increase range of motion and/or to prevent further decrease in range of motion for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for activities of daily living, Resident #161.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain appropriate parameters of nutritional status for 1 of 8 residents reviewed for nutrition, Resident #169.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles in 1 of 3 medication rooms, and 1 of 4 medication carts.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was stored in the kitchen cooler and in the stock/storage room areas in accordance with professional standards.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medical records were documented accurately for wound care treatments for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for skin conditions (Resident #4), and for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for turning and positioning and 1 of 4 residents reviewed for discharge (Resident #430).
9 fire safety citations on file: 2 on July 16, 2026, 2 on February 20, 2025, 2 on August 13, 2024, 3 on November 3, 2023.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
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) | 3.58 | 3.82 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.45 | 0.73 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.38 | 3.49 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.19 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.95 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 51.2% | 41.4% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 58.3% | 46.0% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.73 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 3.67 on weekdays and 3.38 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 3.57 in April to June 2025 to 3.58 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 | 3.58 | 0.45 | 3.67 | 3.38 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 151 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.53 | 0.51 | 3.61 | 3.32 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 157 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.55 | 0.52 | 3.65 | 3.28 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 146 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.57 | 0.57 | 3.65 | 3.36 | 0.8% | 0 of 91 | 145 |
| 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. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| 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 | 3.9 | 8.7 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.2 | 0.7 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.2 | 2.5 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.7 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.8 | 9.5 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.0 | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.2 | 8.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 23.2 | 26.1 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 14.5 | 9.1 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.0 | 2.1 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.1 | 1.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Palatka Center for Rehabilitation and Healing's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (58.2% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
58.2% this home
Better 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. 320 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. 400 eligible stays.
7.5% 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. 217 eligible stays.
63.2% 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. 193 residents counted.
0.3% 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. 308 residents counted.
1.2% 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. 308 residents counted.
97.5% this home
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. 81 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: PALATKA SNF OPERATIONS LLC. CMS links this home to Summit Care, a group of 22 nursing homes averaging 3.4 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Palatka SNF Operations Holdings LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 11/08/2021 |
| Jacobson, Scott | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 01/01/2022 |
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.
Licensed assisted living homes in the same town or within 5 miles, each with its Florida inspection record.
These are the official offices in Florida. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.