Average — CMS composite of the measures below.
Past the typical resurvey interval — a standard survey could occur at any time
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of July 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Aviata At Coral Bay during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with a history of diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and recent amputations did not receive timely follow-up care for a left foot surgical wound. Documentation of wound assessments and treatments was missing or incomplete, and scheduled wound care was not consistently performed. The surgeon was not notified of the wound's worsening condition, and the resident missed a scheduled surgical follow-up. The wound deteriorated, showing signs of infection and bone exposure, before the resident was eventually sent to the hospital.
Surveyors identified infection control deficiencies, including improper cleaning of a glucometer by an RN who did not follow facility policy, lack of a gown for laundry sorting, a broom and pan left on the laundry room floor, and a dryer drum with hard residue. The Director of Housekeeping acknowledged the issues with the laundry equipment.
Multiple deficiencies in maintenance and housekeeping were observed, including non-functioning lights, damaged and dirty surfaces, unfinished repairs, and unaddressed debris in common areas and resident rooms. The Maintenance Director acknowledged these issues during an environmental tour.
A resident with significant cognitive impairment and respiratory diagnoses was repeatedly observed with her call bell on the floor and out of reach. Despite being able to communicate and operate her bed controls, the call device was not accessible to her during multiple surveyor observations.
A resident with no cognitive impairment reported missing her clothing for nearly a month, and staff were unaware of the issue until prompted by surveyors. Investigation revealed conflicting documentation about the resident's belongings and a missing inventory sheet. The facility failed to initiate a grievance in a timely manner, and the grievance process remained incomplete several days after the concern was raised.
A resident with documented mental health diagnoses, including bipolar disorder and anxiety, was not provided a PASRR Level 2 evaluation despite Level 1 screening results indicating it was needed. Medical records and psychotherapy notes confirmed the diagnoses, but the required follow-up assessment was not completed.
A resident with intact cognition and a history of cerebral infarction and atrial fibrillation did not receive physician-ordered wound care following a dermatology procedure because the orders were not transcribed to the MAR or TAR. This omission was discovered after the resident developed a wound infection, which was identified during a follow-up visit with the dermatologist. The DON confirmed the treatment was not performed due to the orders not being properly processed in the electronic health record.
Two residents requiring oxygen therapy did not receive care in accordance with physician orders, as their oxygen concentrators were set either above or below the prescribed flow rates. LPN staff confirmed the discrepancies during interviews, and photographic evidence supported the findings.
A resident was provided with side rails at the request of a family member following a recent fall, but facility staff did not complete the required evaluation or obtain informed consent prior to installation. The DON believed a therapy evaluation was sufficient and only completed the side rail assessment after the rails were already in place, contrary to facility policy.
Two residents with specific dietary needs and preferences did not receive appropriate meals, including one vegetarian who was not identified as such in facility records and another who was repeatedly served burnt or inedible food and not provided a pork-free alternative despite religious restrictions. Both residents reported their concerns to dietary staff, but the issues were not resolved, resulting in inadequate meal service.
Two residents with significant medical needs did not consistently receive restorative therapy as recommended, due to insufficient staffing and lack of documentation. Although therapy recommendations were made, the facility did not have an active restorative program, and the sole restorative aide was unable to document or provide services to all assigned residents. This resulted in a failure to provide and record required restorative therapy services.
Two residents receiving narcotic medications experienced discrepancies between paper and electronic medication records, with errors in dates and times of administration. Nursing staff admitted to documentation mistakes, and the DON confirmed the inconsistencies between the records.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple chronic conditions did not receive a pneumococcal vaccine despite having a signed consent on file. Review of records and staff interviews confirmed there was no documentation of vaccine administration after consent was obtained.
A resident with a history of wandering and multiple medical conditions eloped from the facility after lapses in 1:1 supervision occurred due to staffing shortages and inconsistent monitoring. Despite interventions such as frequent checks and electronic monitoring, the resident exited through an alarmed door and was found outside by staff and law enforcement nearly an hour later. Staff interviews confirmed that supervision was not maintained as required by the care plan, and the facility's policy did not specifically address 1:1 supervision.
The facility failed to consistently document the administration of controlled medications for three residents, leading to discrepancies between the Medication Monitoring/Control Record and the MAR. This resulted in undocumented doses of Dilaudid, Tramadol, and Oxycodone, with some medications administered more frequently than prescribed. The Director of Nursing confirmed the documentation failures.
The facility failed to conduct thorough investigations into allegations of abuse and neglect involving two residents. One resident reported verbal abuse and neglect by a CNA, while another incident involved unanswered call lights. Investigations lacked comprehensive interviews and statements from key staff and witnesses. Additionally, a grievance regarding a privacy violation by the administrator was inadequately investigated.
A resident with multiple pain-related diagnoses did not receive timely refills of prescribed pain medications, resulting in extended periods without pain relief. The facility's records showed lapses in administering Xtampza ER and Dilaudid, with the resident missing several doses over consecutive days. Interviews revealed the resident experienced significant pain and frustration due to the lack of urgency in reordering medications.
A facility failed to prevent a resident, assessed as at risk for elopement, from exiting the premises twice in one day. Despite initial interventions, the resident left the facility early in the morning and was returned by staff, but no additional measures were taken. Later, the resident eloped again and was returned by law enforcement. The RNC noted that the administration should have been informed and 1:1 observation should have been implemented.
Failure to Provide Timely Follow-Up and Communication for Surgical Wound Care
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide timely follow-up care for a resident with a left foot surgical wound. The resident, who had a history of diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and recent amputations, was admitted with orders for IV antibiotics and follow-up with a surgeon and infectious disease. There was no care plan for the surgical wound, and documentation of the wound's condition or treatment was missing from admission until several days later. Orders for wound care and wound vac application were not consistently documented as completed, and there was no explanation for missed treatments. Additionally, there was no evidence that the resident attended a scheduled surgeon appointment or that the surgeon was notified of changes in the wound's condition, despite worsening symptoms and positive wound cultures for infection. Progress notes indicated that the resident's wound deteriorated, showing signs of infection, bone exposure, and purulent discharge, yet there was still no documentation of timely notification to the surgeon. The resident was eventually transferred to the hospital for evaluation, and only after further decline was an appointment with the surgeon arranged. Interviews with facility leadership confirmed the lack of documentation and follow-up, as well as the failure to notify the surgeon of significant changes in the resident's wound status.
Infection Control Deficiencies in Laundry and Glucometer Cleaning
Penalty
Summary
Surveyors observed multiple deficiencies in the facility's infection prevention and control practices. In the medication administration process, a registered nurse failed to properly clean and disinfect a glucometer after use. Instead of wiping the entire surface of the glucometer horizontally and vertically as required by facility policy, the nurse wrapped the device in a disinfectant wipe and allowed it to sit for three minutes, stating she would wipe it down afterward. This method did not align with the facility's written procedures for cleaning and disinfecting the device after contact with blood or body fluids. In the laundry room, several sanitation issues were identified. A broom and pan were found resting on the floor in the dirty area, and there was no gown available for staff to use while sorting laundry in this area. Additionally, one of the dryers had dry, hard residue stuck on the drum, which was visually confirmed and documented with photographic evidence. The Director of Housekeeping acknowledged the condition of the dryer and noted its age and the desire to replace the drum.
Failure to Maintain Safe, Clean, and Homelike Environment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, and homelike environment for residents, as evidenced by multiple deficiencies in maintenance and housekeeping services. In the lobby/reception area, 14 out of 16 lights were not functioning, and another light was flickering. The main dining room on the second floor had windows with unidentified residue and peeling tint, an accumulation of dust in the air vent above the handwashing sink, and an unfinished ceiling that required sanding and painting. The elevator near the main dining room had peeling paint on the frame and door, and the linoleum flooring inside was damaged and peeling. In the courtyard, a canopy was torn and in disrepair, and a fallen screen from an attached unit remained on the ground throughout the survey. On the second floor, several resident rooms exhibited various issues, including scuff marks, missing paint exposing rust, torn air conditioning filters, residue on furniture, brown spots and debris in air conditioning units, stained privacy curtains, dirty filters, dried fluid on dressers, damaged over-bed tables, constantly running sinks, holes in restroom doors, unsecured baseboards, rub marks on walls, separating floor tiles, exposed adhesive, scratched doors, and holes in walls and baseboards. These findings were acknowledged by the Maintenance Director during an environmental tour, who also confirmed the tacky surface of the windows in the main dining room.
Call Bell Not Maintained Within Reach for Cognitively Impaired Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain the call device within reach for one resident with significant cognitive impairment. Record review showed the resident was admitted with diagnoses including Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Emphysema, and had a BIMS score of 00, indicating significant cognitive impairment. During multiple observations over several days, the call bell was found on the floor beneath the resident's bed and not within her reach. In an interview, the resident demonstrated understanding of the call bell's purpose and reported having used it before. She was also able to communicate her preferences and operate the bed controls independently. However, the repeated observations confirmed that the call device was not accessible to her during the survey period.
Failure to Timely File Grievance for Missing Resident Belongings
Penalty
Summary
A resident who was admitted to the facility with no cognitive impairment, as indicated by a BIMS score of 14, reported not receiving her clean clothes for almost a month. The resident stated during interviews that she had not had her laundry returned in 3 to 4 weeks and was wearing clothing that did not belong to her. The issue was not known to the Regional Social Worker until it was brought up during the survey, at which point the Social Worker began to investigate the missing clothing. Further investigation revealed that the previous social worker at the resident's prior facility confirmed the resident left with all her belongings, contradicting the documentation at the current facility that stated she arrived with none. There was no inventory sheet found in the resident's chart to verify her belongings upon admission. The grievance process for the missing clothing was not initiated until after the issue was raised by surveyors, and the grievance remained incomplete several days later.
Failure to Complete Required PASRR Level 2 Evaluation
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when the facility failed to provide a PASRR (Preadmission Screening and Resident Review) Level 2 evaluation for a resident whose Level 1 screening indicated the need for further assessment. The resident, who had a history of anxiety disorder and bipolar disorder, was readmitted to the facility and had a BIMS score indicating no cognitive impairment. Medical records and psychotherapy notes documented diagnoses of bipolar disorder and anxiety. However, the PASRR Level 1 screenings, including the most recent one, did not consistently reflect all current mental health diagnoses, but still indicated the need for a Level 2 evaluation. Despite this, the required PASRR Level 2 was not completed as indicated by the screening results and confirmed by the Regional Social Worker during the survey.
Failure to Provide Physician-Ordered Wound Care After Dermatology Procedure
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when the facility failed to provide physician-ordered wound care following a dermatology procedure for a resident with a history of cerebral infarction and atrial fibrillation. The resident, who was cognitively intact, underwent a micrographic surgery to remove skin cancer and returned to the facility with specific wound care instructions, including washing the biopsy area, applying Vaseline or mupirocin, covering with Telfa and paper tape, and monitoring for signs of infection. These orders were not transcribed onto the Medication Administration Record (MAR) or Treatment Administration Record (TAR), resulting in the wound care not being performed as prescribed. The issue was identified when the resident reported to surveyors that, during a follow-up visit, the dermatologist noted an infection in the wound due to lack of wound care. The Director of Nursing confirmed that while the orders were entered into the electronic health record, they were not directed to the MAR or TAR, leading to the omission of the required treatment. Subsequent documentation showed that the resident required additional medical intervention, including a new wound care order and an oral antibiotic, after the infection was identified.
Failure to Administer Oxygen Therapy per Physician Orders
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide respiratory care in accordance with professional standards of practice for two residents who required oxygen therapy. For one resident with diagnoses including heart failure, morbid obesity, and COPD, the care plan required oxygen therapy at 2 liters per minute as ordered by the physician. However, multiple observations revealed that the oxygen concentrator was set above the prescribed rate, ranging from 3 to 3.5 liters per minute, contrary to the physician's order. Staff confirmed the oxygen was set higher than ordered during interviews. For another resident with morbid obesity, shortness of breath, and generalized muscle weakness, the physician's order specified oxygen at 2 liters per minute via nasal cannula as needed to maintain saturations above 92%. Observations showed the oxygen concentrator was set below the ordered rate, between 1 and 1.5 liters per minute, and staff confirmed the setting was less than 2 liters per minute. These findings were supported by photographic evidence and staff interviews, demonstrating a failure to follow physician orders for oxygen administration for both residents.
Failure to Complete Required Assessment and Consent Prior to Bed Rail Installation
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow its established procedure for the installation of side rails for a resident. According to facility policy, prior to installing side rails, staff are required to complete a side rail evaluation to assess the resident for risk of entrapment, review the risks and benefits with the resident or their representative, obtain informed consent, secure a physician order, and update the care plan and kardex. Observation revealed that a resident had bilateral one quarter side rails installed on their bed, and both the resident and their sister confirmed that the rails were installed that afternoon at the sister's request due to recent falls. Record review showed there was no documentation of a completed evaluation or signed consent prior to the installation of the side rails. During interviews, the DON stated that the side rails were installed following a verbal request from the resident's mother and believed that a therapy admission evaluation sufficed as the required assessment. However, the DON later provided a side rail evaluation that was completed after the installation, indicating that the required assessment and consent process were not followed prior to the intervention.
Failure to Provide Well-Balanced Diets and Honor Food Preferences
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a well-balanced diet that met the nutritional needs and honored the food preferences of two residents. One resident, who had a history of acute and chronic respiratory failure, COPD, and pneumonia, was not identified as a vegetarian in his food preference or nutrition assessment forms. As a result, he was repeatedly served meals that did not align with his dietary needs, including being given potato chips as a main dish and lacking adequate protein variety. The registered dietitian was unaware of the resident's vegetarian status until informed by the surveyor, and the kitchen manager acknowledged that there was no specific diet for lacto-ovo-vegetarians, despite having discussed preferences with the resident multiple times. Another resident, admitted with intervertebral disc displacement and on a carbohydrate-controlled, no added salt diet, reported that his meals were consistently overcooked, burnt, and of poor quality. He provided photographic evidence of inedible meals, including being served only potato chips as an entrée when the main dish included pork, which he could not eat for religious reasons. The resident stated that he had repeatedly voiced his concerns to the Certified Dietary Manager (CDM), but the issues persisted and were not resolved. The CDM acknowledged the resident's complaints and confirmed that the meal ticket system failed to capture his need for a pork-free alternative entrée. Both residents were cognitively intact and able to clearly communicate their dietary needs and dissatisfaction with the meals provided. Despite their repeated efforts to address these concerns with dietary staff, the facility did not ensure that their nutritional needs and food preferences were consistently met, resulting in inadequate and inappropriate meal service.
Failure to Provide and Document Restorative Therapy Services
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide restorative therapy services as recommended for two residents with significant medical needs. One resident with paraplegia, who was cognitively intact, reported receiving restorative therapy infrequently due to staff shortages. There were no active therapy orders in the resident's record, and the Director of Physical Therapy was initially unaware of the resident's therapy status. Documentation provided indicated the resident was part of the Restorative Nursing Program (RNP), but there was no evidence of therapy orders or records of services provided. The Director of Nursing confirmed that the facility did not have a functioning RNP due to insufficient staffing, and acknowledged that documentation of restorative services was lacking, despite the expectation that such documentation should be maintained in the electronic medical record. A second resident, also cognitively intact and with a history of cerebral infarction and atrial fibrillation, reported inconsistent receipt of restorative therapy after being discharged from physical therapy due to insurance issues. The Director of Physical Therapy had referred this resident to restorative therapy, but the facility did not have an active restorative program in place. The only restorative aide, Staff C, was responsible for 29 residents but had not documented any restorative services provided, citing lack of access to a documentation kiosk and not keeping written records. The Director of Nursing confirmed that the facility previously had a restorative program but currently lacked the necessary staff to operate it effectively. Interviews with staff revealed that restorative therapy recommendations were being made and residents were identified for the program, but there was no systematic tracking or documentation of services rendered. The sole restorative aide selected therapy days based on her work schedule and attempted to see all assigned residents, but admitted it was difficult to provide adequate time to each due to workload. The lack of documentation and insufficient staffing led to the failure to provide and record restorative therapy as required for the residents.
Inaccurate Documentation of Narcotic Administration
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to accurately document the administration of narcotic medications for two residents. For one resident with encephalopathy and moderate cognitive impairment, there was an active order for Lorazepam 0.5mg as needed. Documentation discrepancies were found between the paper Medical Monitoring/Control Record (MMCR) and the electronic Medication Administration Record (MAR), including a dose recorded on the MMCR but not on the MAR, and mismatched administration times between the two records. The nurse responsible admitted to making errors in documenting the date and time of administration. For another resident with hemiplegia and a history of cerebral infarction, who was cognitively intact, there was an active order for Lacosamide 100mg twice daily for seizures. The MMCR showed three administrations of Lacosamide on one day and one on the following day, while the MAR reflected only two administrations on the first day and one on the second. The nurse involved acknowledged a mistake in documenting the date on the paper narcotic log, stating she did not work on the day in question. The DON confirmed the discrepancies and agreed that accurate documentation is essential, especially for narcotics.
Failure to Administer Pneumococcal Vaccine After Consent
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a pneumococcal vaccination to a resident who had consented to receive it. The resident, who had severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses including dementia, congestive heart failure, and type 2 diabetes mellitus, was admitted to the facility and had a signed consent for the pneumonia vaccine on file. Upon review of records and interviews with the Infection Preventionist and DON, there was no documentation in the electronic health record that the vaccine had been administered. The DON and Infection Preventionist were unable to locate any evidence that the vaccine was given following the initial consent.
Failure to Provide Adequate Supervision Resulting in Resident Elopement
Penalty
Summary
A deficiency occurred when the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent the elopement of a resident identified as being at risk for wandering and elopement. The resident had a history of exit-seeking behaviors, multiple prior elopement attempts, and was assessed as an elopement risk due to cognitive impairment, poor decision-making skills, and independent ambulation. The resident's care plan included interventions such as frequent monitoring, 1:1 supervision, room relocation away from exits, and the use of an electronic monitoring device. Despite these interventions, the resident was able to exit the facility through an alarmed door and was found by staff and law enforcement outside the facility after being missing for nearly an hour. On the night of the incident, staffing was compromised due to a CNA not showing up for the shift, resulting in only three CNAs present instead of the scheduled four. The remaining CNAs implemented an hourly rotation for 1:1 supervision of the resident. However, lapses in supervision occurred during shift changes and when CNAs attended to other residents, leaving the resident unsupervised. Staff interviews confirmed that the CNA assigned to supervise the resident was not present at the time of elopement, and the LPN on duty was unaware of the resident's whereabouts until the door alarm sounded. The resident, who had multiple medical diagnoses including hypertension, diabetes, hip fracture, seizure disorder, and dependence on dialysis, was found outside the facility and returned safely. Documentation and interviews revealed that the facility's elopement policy did not specifically address 1:1 supervision, and staff decisions regarding supervision rotations were made without notifying facility leadership. The deficiency was directly related to inadequate supervision and failure to maintain consistent monitoring as outlined in the resident's care plan.
Medication Documentation Failures
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure consistent implementation of a medication record system for controlled medications, leading to discrepancies in documentation for three residents. For Resident #1, the nurses did not consistently document the administration of Dilaudid, resulting in 12 undocumented doses in August and 6 in September. This inconsistency allowed for the medication to be administered more frequently than prescribed, with instances of doses given within 3.5 to 6 hours instead of the prescribed 8-hour interval. Resident #2's records showed similar issues with Tramadol administration, where 7 doses in August and 5 in September were not documented on the Medication Administration Record (MAR). The discrepancies between the Medication Monitoring/Control Record and the MAR were confirmed by the Director of Nursing, who acknowledged the failure of nurses to document medication administration consistently. For Resident #3, the administration of Oxycodone was not consistently documented, with 12 doses missing from the MAR in September. The Director of Nursing was informed of the ongoing pattern of documentation failures, highlighting the discrepancies between the Control Record and the MAR. These failures indicate a lack of adherence to proper medication administration and documentation protocols.
Incomplete Investigations into Allegations of Abuse and Neglect
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide evidence of thorough investigations into allegations of abuse and neglect for two residents. In the first case, a resident alleged neglect and verbal abuse by a CNA, who reportedly yelled at the resident and left him in a soiled brief for two hours. The investigation lacked comprehensive interviews and statements, including those from the nurse on duty and the resident's roommate, who witnessed the incident. The facility did not file a report regarding the verbal altercation, and there was no follow-up on the roommate's statement. In the second incident involving the same resident, the resident alleged neglect when his call light went unanswered for two hours. The investigation was incomplete, with missing statements from key staff members, including the nurse who was on duty. The facility suspended the CNA involved but failed to document a complete investigation or confirm the resident's care during the alleged neglect period. Additionally, a separate grievance was filed by another resident, who alleged a violation of privacy when the facility's administrator discussed his financial matters in a therapy room in the presence of other residents and therapists. The investigation into this grievance was also incomplete, lacking statements from all individuals present during the incident and failing to follow up with the resident to identify other witnesses.
Failure to Provide Timely Pain Medication Refills
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide effective pain management for a resident by not obtaining pain medication refills in a timely manner. The resident, who had multiple diagnoses including intervertebral disc displacement, peripheral vascular disease, and diabetic neuropathy, was prescribed Dilaudid and Xtampza ER for pain management. However, there were lapses in medication administration, with the resident missing doses of Xtampza ER for two days and Dilaudid for another two days, resulting in extended periods without pain relief. The Medication Monitoring/Control Record showed discrepancies in the administration of the prescribed medications. The records indicated that the resident did not receive the routine Xtampza ER doses on two consecutive days and missed six possible doses of Dilaudid over another two-day period. Despite the nurse signing the Medication Administration Record, the Director of Nursing confirmed that Xtampza ER was not available in the facility's emergency medication kit, and there was no evidence of Dilaudid being accessed from the emergency kit during the shortage. Interviews with the resident and the Director of Nursing revealed that the resident experienced significant pain during these periods without medication, reporting pain levels as high as 9 on a scale of 1-10. The resident expressed frustration over the lack of urgency in reordering medications and described being in constant pain, resorting to using ice packs for relief. The facility had previously identified a concern regarding the resident's pain management and had revised the care plan to address the risk of pain related to chronic illness, but the interventions were not effectively implemented.
Failure to Prevent Resident Elopement
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent an elopement incident involving a resident at risk for elopement. The resident, who was cognitively intact and required partial/moderate assistance with activities of daily living, was assessed and care planned for elopement risk. Despite having interventions in place, the resident exited the facility at approximately 5:00 AM and was returned by staff at 5:15 AM. However, no additional interventions were implemented following this initial elopement. Later that day, at 11:00 AM, the resident exited the facility again and was returned by law enforcement at 12:30 PM. The Regional Nurse Consultant indicated that the Nursing Home Administrator and Director of Nursing should have been notified, and the resident should have been placed on 1:1 observation to prevent the second elopement.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 184 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 5 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near West Palm Beach
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Palm Beach Nursing Center | 1.1 mi | ★★★★★ | 13 | 0 |
| Pine Trail Nursing And Rehab Center | 1.6 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Beach Breeze Rehab And Care Center | 2 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Aviata At Greenacres | 2.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 5 | 0 |
| Aviata At West Palm Beach | 3.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 18 | 2 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Aviata At Coral Bay.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release July 2026) and official state health department websites.