Below average — CMS composite of the measures below.
The next survey window likely opens around September 2026
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 Pompano Health And Rehabilitation Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment, dependent for ADLs, was sent to the hospital after a fall. The POA reported being told by a UM that the facility would handle the resident’s return transport and call back, but no follow-up occurred and the POA paid $150 for transportation. Staff interviews revealed conflicting understandings of who was responsible for arranging and paying for the return. The POA also received a consolidated bill covering several prior months and requested a fully itemized statement with clear explanations of services. The BOM emailed a non-itemized bill, was unaware of the itemization request, and had no further contact with the POA, leaving the billing grievance unresolved.
Food safety standards were not maintained in the kitchen and on the tray line. Surveyors observed sanitizer in the 3-compartment sinks at an excessive concentration, melted and partially opened ice cream cups in the freezer, debris in the back of the freezer, and insects in multiple life stages on the kitchen walls and floor. A Cook also handled food and serving utensils with bare hands while checking temps on the tray line and did not replace a contaminated ladle.
Multiple residents had no care plans for advance directives or code status despite DNR or full code orders, including residents with dementia, stroke, COPD, and other serious diagnoses. A resident with a urinary catheter also lacked a catheter care plan; the chart showed EBP and catheter care orders, but the care plan focused on trauma informed care instead, and the resident reported catheter care was not done every day.
Call Lights Not Kept Within Reach: The facility failed to keep call lights within reach for three residents. One resident had cerebral infarction, weakness, lack of coordination, and dementia with severe cognitive impairment; another had lack of coordination, repeated falls, diabetes, and dementia with severe cognitive impairment; and a third had MS, hemiplegia/hemiparesis after CVA, and chronic pain. During observations, one call light was hanging on the back of the bed, and two were on the floor next to the bed and not accessible. CNA interviews stated call lights were placed near the resident after care was completed.
Failure to support a resident’s choice and activity schedule by not ensuring access to a TV in the room. A cognitively intact resident whose activity of choice was watching TV reported that the TV on his side was broken and staff told him he would need to buy a replacement. The Maintenance Director said only short-term rooms had TVs and long-term residents had to purchase their own, while Staff F said the resident was offered to buy one, have family pay, or move to another room with a TV, but he refused. A facility tour found many rooms without TVs and others with TVs.
Failure to Maintain Safe Environment and Follow Fall Interventions: A resident with severe cognitive impairment, repeated falls, DM2, and dementia had fall interventions added to the care plan after two falls, including floor mats, 30-minute checks, a call light within reach, and a clutter-free area. Surveyors observed the call light on the floor and later found a wheelchair blocking one of the bedside mats, while a CNA stated the resident was not at risk for falls and described inconsistent placement of the call light and wheelchair.
A resident with ESRD, malnutrition, DM2, and severe cognitive impairment had a 10% weight loss over 2 months that was not addressed promptly. The resident’s Jevity 1.5 tube feeding order at 85 mL/hr was not followed consistently, as repeated observations showed the feeding bottle levels did not match the expected infusion rate and the tube feeding was found on hold at times.
Failure to Follow Respiratory and Oxygen Orders: A resident with a trach and severe cognitive impairment received trach suctioning without the required pre- and post-respiratory assessments, and the TAR lacked documentation of those assessments. An LPN performed trach care and suctioning but did not check lung sounds, respirations, or oxygen status. Another resident was observed using oxygen equipment even though no current oxygen order was in the chart, and staff could not locate an active order despite the resident using oxygen most of the time.
Missing dialysis communication sheets were found for a resident dependent on dialysis. The resident had ESRD, was ordered to receive dialysis three times weekly, and had care plan interventions for collaboration with the dialysis center. Staff and the DON stated that dialysis communication sheets are completed before transport, finished by the dialysis center, returned with the resident, reviewed by nursing for new orders or fluid restrictions, and filed in the dialysis binder the same day, but several sheets were missing from the binder.
A resident with PTSD and intact cognition had documented anxiety-related triggers, including situations that caused flashbacks or increased anxiety, and his care plan referenced trauma-informed care. However, the facility failed to clearly identify and implement care plan triggers for the resident, even though staff interviews confirmed he had reported yelling and anxiety as triggers and that these concerns had been discussed among staff.
A resident with Parkinson's disease and dementia had an order for PRN Alprazolam, a controlled drug, that was later discontinued. The controlled drug inventory showed the medication was signed out, but the MAR and nurse notes had no documentation that it was administered. The DON acknowledged the medication was discontinued and not documented as given.
Medications were not secured for a resident with CVA-related diagnoses and aphasia. Two OTC products, including muscle rub and triple antibiotic ointment, were observed on the resident’s overbed table, and the resident indicated she used them on her arm and leg. An LPN and the RN/UM both stated residents are not supposed to have medications at the bedside.
Failure to follow enhanced barrier precautions was identified for a resident with DM, neuropathy, and a foot ulcer who had an order and care plan for EBP. During ADL care, toileting, transfers, and return to bed, staff wore gloves but did not wear the required gown and gloves during high-contact care activities. The DON and staff interviews confirmed differing understanding of PPE use for EBP.
Failure to Provide Ordered Flu and Pneumococcal Vaccines: Two residents with significant medical histories, including respiratory and cardiac conditions, did not receive ordered influenza and pneumococcal vaccines. Records showed conflicting consent and declination documentation, and the UM/IP stated vaccines were offered on admission and annually in September, while one resident said he did not remember staff offering the flu or pneumonia vaccine.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment had medical records that contained repeated documentation errors, including male genitalia assessments for a female and incorrect foley catheter status. The NP also failed to communicate significant clinical findings to the resident's representative, resulting in records not maintained according to professional standards.
A resident with multiple medical conditions did not have a current physician order for a right upper access device following re-admission, and the dressing on the device was not changed or documented as changed according to facility policy. The outdated dressing was observed during survey, and staff confirmed it had not been changed as required. Documentation in the MAR and TAR was incomplete, and there was no nursing note describing the site status or skin condition under the dressing.
A resident with multiple medical conditions and severe cognitive impairment did not have a current physician order for a right upper access device, and the dressing on the device was not changed or documented as required by facility policy. The outdated dressing was observed during survey, and staff acknowledged the lapse in following protocol and documentation.
Surveyors found that the facility did not post the current date on Nurse Staffing Information forms in two observed areas, as required. Staff explained that the process relied on the night nurse to update postings at midnight, but the previous day's forms remained displayed. The Administrator and DON confirmed the requirement for daily, current postings.
Surveyors found that the facility did not post the current date on Nurse Staffing Information forms in two observed areas, leaving outdated staffing data visible. Staff interviews confirmed that the process for updating postings was not followed, and both the Administrator and DON acknowledged the requirement for daily updates was not met.
The facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and homelike environment in one of its wings. Persistent offensive urine-like odors were noted in Resident #67's room and the hallway between rooms 60 to 62. Despite cleaning efforts, the issue remained unresolved, impacting the comfort and safety of the residents.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment was found with a bruise around her right eye, but the facility failed to document and investigate the injury as required by their Abuse Prevention Program policy. Staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in reporting and documentation of the incident.
The facility failed to initiate comprehensive care plans with measurable objectives and interventions for two residents on psychotropic medications. One resident's care plan did not address multiple psychotropic medications, while another's care plan failed to include an antipsychotic medication. Staff interviews confirmed these omissions.
A facility failed to follow wound care protocols and ensure an air loss mattress was functioning for a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, including a sacral pressure ulcer. An LPN did not change gloves between cleaning the resident's bottom and applying treatment to the wound, and the air loss mattress was found turned off, with staff unaware of how long it had been off.
The facility failed to provide proper catheter care for a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple medical conditions. The resident had an incorrect catheter size, an undated urinary drainage bag, and the catheter tubing was not anchored. Additionally, the drainage bag was placed on the bed during care, contrary to standard practice. Staff interviews confirmed these improper practices, leading to deficiencies in the resident's care.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment experienced significant weight loss due to the facility's failure to provide timely nutritional interventions. Despite recommendations for fortified cereal and nutritional supplements, no follow-up assessments were conducted, and the resident's weight continued to decline.
The facility failed to ensure accurate reconciliation and documentation of controlled substances and other medications for multiple residents. Issues included administering medications without valid orders, discrepancies between the Controlled Drug Declining Inventory Sheet and the MAR, improper disposal of controlled substances, and unavailability of prescribed medications.
The facility failed to address PRN psychotropic medications with no stop date in a timely manner for three residents on hospice care, leading to non-compliance with the facility's policy requiring discontinuation or documented rationale for continued use beyond 14 days.
The facility failed to maintain medications and medication carts in a secure and sanitary manner. Staff left medication carts unlocked and unattended, and expired eye drops and loose pills were found in the carts. The facility's policies on medication storage and administration were not followed.
The facility failed to follow their menus to meet the nutritional needs of the residents. Corned beef served on a regular diet plate was only 1 ounce instead of the 3 ounces specified in the menu, affecting 40 residents.
The facility failed to provide correct food choices and preferences for three residents. One resident did not receive the protein listed on her breakfast tray, another did not get salad dressing, and a third did not receive fortified pudding or a mighty shake as specified on their meal tickets. Interviews revealed that while tray audits are conducted, discrepancies in meal delivery still occurred.
The facility failed to adhere to the fluid restriction for a resident with ESRD on dialysis. The resident was observed with more fluids than prescribed and water at the bedside, contrary to physician's orders and the care plan. Staff interviews indicated a lapse in communication and protocol adherence.
The facility failed to adhere to professional standards for food service safety, including improper storage, labeling, and handling of food, as well as poor hygiene practices by staff. Observations included open garbage cans, debris on the floor, improperly labeled food containers, and a dietary aide plating food with bare hands without washing them.
Failure to Resolve Grievances Related to Transportation and Billing
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to honor a resident representative’s grievances regarding transportation and billing. The resident, who had moderate cognitive impairment and required substantial to maximal assistance with ADLs, was sent to the hospital via 911 after a fall on 12/04/25. The resident’s POA reported that when the hospital contacted her about returning the resident to the facility, she called the facility and was told by the Unit Manager not to worry and that the facility would handle the transportation and call her back. The POA did not receive a follow-up call and ultimately paid $150.00 for the resident’s return transport. Interviews later showed differing understandings among staff: the UM stated she believed hospitals usually arrange return transportation and reported being told the resident’s insurance would not cover it, while the DON and Admissions Coordinator stated that Admissions is responsible for arranging returns and that, for this long-term care resident, the facility should have paid regardless of insurance. The facility also failed to adequately address the POA’s grievance regarding billing. The POA received a bill in November 2025 that included charges from August, September, and October and requested a complete itemized billing statement from the start of the resident’s stay, including a clear explanation of services rendered. The grievance record dated 12/16/25 documented this request. The Business Office Manager reported speaking with the POA by phone and emailing a copy of the bill on 11/19/25, but the attached billing statement was not itemized as requested. The BOM stated she was not aware that an itemized bill had been requested and confirmed she had no further contact with the POA after sending the non-itemized bill, leaving the POA’s specific grievance about itemization unresolved.
Food Safety and Kitchen Sanitation Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to keep food safety requirements in accordance with professional standards during observations of the main kitchen and tray line. In the main kitchen, the sanitation solution in the 3-compartment sinks was measured at between 400 and 500 parts per million, which was above the normal range noted by the surveyor. The reach-in freezer contained four containers of ice cream cups that were melted and partially opened, and the back of the freezer contained debris, plastic containers, and napkins. Insects in all stages of life were observed on the walls and floor of the main kitchen. The Kitchen Manager stated she was not aware of any insects in the kitchen and that no staff had complained of seeing any insects, although she later stated that a cook had observed insects and reported it in a pest control binder. During the lunch tray line observation, a Cook took temperatures of cooked pasta, fortified pureed pasta, and mashed potatoes with a facility-calibrated thermometer while touching the food and serving utensils with bare hands, and she did not replace the serving ladle with a clean one.
Missing Advance Directive and Catheter Care Plans
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to initiate care plans for advance directives for multiple sampled residents, including residents with DNR orders and residents with full code status. Resident #10 was admitted with cerebrovascular disease and severe vascular dementia with anxiety, had a BIMS score of 06, and had a physician order for DNR. Although the care plan documented a terminal diagnosis and included an intervention to honor advanced directives, it referenced an advance directives care plan that was not present. Resident #27 was admitted and readmitted with diagnoses including nontraumatic compartment syndrome of the left lower extremity and COPD, had a BIMS score of 09, and also had a DNR order, but no advance directives care plan was developed. Resident #60 was admitted and readmitted with diagnoses including COPD, acute pulmonary edema, and allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis, had a BIMS score of 15, and had a DNR order, but no care plan for advanced directives or code status was in place. Resident #72 was admitted and readmitted with diagnoses including Guillain-Barre syndrome and pain due to internal prosthetic devices, implants, and grafts, had a BIMS score of 15, had an order for full resuscitation, and also had no care plan for advanced directives or code status. Resident #99 was admitted with diagnoses including cerebral infarction due to embolism of the left middle cerebral artery, other lack of coordination, and aphasia, and the MDS indicated the resident could not be interviewed because the resident was rarely or never understood; the resident had a full code order, but no care plan for code status or advance directives was present. The facility also failed to initiate a care plan for catheter-related care for Resident #126. This resident was admitted with bladder-neck obstruction, had intact cognition with a BIMS score of 14, and had orders for enhanced barrier precautions every shift and urinary catheter care daily and as needed. During observation, the resident was sitting in a wheelchair with a urinary drainage bag covered and hanging from the side of the wheelchair, and the resident stated that staff did not provide catheter care every day and that sometimes the resident had to empty the bag. The care plan in the record focused on trauma informed care and included no care plan for EBP or catheter care, and there was no order for contact precautions.
Call Lights Not Kept Within Reach
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences by not keeping call lights within reach for 3 of 27 sampled residents. The facility policy titled Physical Environment stated that an applicable working system must be in place and within reach for the resident to summon assistance, including a typical call light with cord. Resident #44 was readmitted with diagnoses including cerebral infarction, weakness, lack of coordination, and dementia, and had a BIMS score of 06 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Her ADL care plan included an intervention to keep the call bell within reach, but during observation she was in bed with the call light hanging on the back of the bed and not accessible to her. Resident #90 was admitted with diagnoses including lack of coordination, hypertension, repeated falls, anemia, diabetes, and dementia, and had a BIMS score of 01 indicating severe cognitive impairment. His fall care plan included the intervention to keep the call light within reach, but during observation the call light was on the floor next to the bed and not accessible. Resident #104 was readmitted with diagnoses including multiple sclerosis, hemiplegia and hemiparesis after cerebral infarction, lack of coordination, malaise, and chronic pain. Her MDS showed a BIMS score of 15 and substantial to maximum assistance needed for rolling in bed, and her fall care plan included keeping the call light within reach. During observation, her call light was on the floor next to her bed and she could not reach it. CNA interviews stated that after care is completed, the call light is placed next to the resident on the bed where it can be reached.
Failure to Support Resident Choice for TV Access
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to support Resident #8’s choices, activities, and schedule by not ensuring access to a television in the resident’s room. Resident #8 was readmitted with diagnoses of heart failure and diabetes, and the Annual MDS showed a BIMS score of 15, indicating intact cognition. The Quarterly Activity assessment identified watching TV as the resident’s activity of choice, and the Activity Care Plan stated the resident would be encouraged to participate in activities of choice. Resident #8 reported that about a month earlier, the TV on his side was found shattered on top of the nightstand and was not his TV, and he said staff told him he would need to buy a replacement on his own. The Maintenance Director stated that only the South Wing short-term rooms had TVs and that long-term residents in other rooms had to purchase their own TVs or have family buy them. He also stated he had a TV that fell and broke, discarded it, and told Resident #8 he would ask the former Administrator about purchasing a replacement, but he did not receive follow-up. Staff F stated that Resident #8 was told he was a long-term resident and would need to purchase his own TV, or have family pay for it, and that he refused both options. Staff F also offered a room change to a room with a TV, which the resident refused. A facility tour showed 21 rooms without televisions and 42 rooms with televisions.
Failure to Maintain Safe Environment and Follow Fall Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that Resident #90’s environment remained free from accident hazards and failed to follow fall interventions for a resident with severe cognitive impairment. Resident #90 was admitted with diagnoses including Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, repeated falls, and dementia. The MDS documented a BIMS score of 1, indicating severely impaired cognition. After two documented falls, the resident’s care plan was updated to include floor mats when in bed, 30-minute checks, a call light within reach, and an area free of clutter. During observation, the resident’s call light was found on the floor next to the bed and not within reach. Later the resident was observed sleeping in bed with bilateral mats on both sides, and a wheelchair was positioned next to the air conditioner on top of the right mat, blocking it if a fall were to occur. The DON stated that new interventions are recorded in the care plan the same day or next day and that after the first fall the resident was placed on 30-minute checks, with bilateral mats added after the second fall. A CNA stated she placed the call light near the resident’s hand after care, checked on the resident every 30 to 40 minutes, did not consider the resident at risk for falls, and described placing the wheelchair behind the bed with footrests in the closet.
Tube Feeding Order Not Followed and Significant Weight Loss Not Addressed
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow the physician’s tube feeding order for Resident #5 and failed to address a significant weight loss in a timely manner. Resident #5 was readmitted with diagnoses of End Stage Renal Disease, Moderate Calorie and Protein Malnutrition, and Type 2 Diabetes, and the Quarterly MDS showed severe cognitive impairment. The weight log showed a decline from 139.2 pounds on 07/04/25 to 125.6 pounds on 08/07/25 and 124.8 pounds on 09/05/25, reflecting a 10% weight loss in two months. The facility’s policy defined significant weight loss as 2% in 1 week, 5% in 1 month, 7.5% in 3 months, and 10% in 6 months. The physician ordered Jevity 1.5 tube feeding at 85 mL per hour for a total of 1,275 mL over 24 hours starting on 07/11/25, but observations showed the feeding bottle levels did not match the expected infusion rate. On 09/30/25, the tube feeding was observed running at 85 mL/hour with the bottle at the 850 mL mark after starting at 4:00 AM, then later on hold with the same bottle at 750 mL, then still at 750 mL while running again, and later at the 600 mL mark. On 10/01/25, the tube feeding was again observed on hold, then restarted at 6:40 AM and noted at the 950 mL mark. The Quarterly Nutrition Note dated 09/24/25 documented substantial weight loss over 3 months and increased needs due to a low BMI of 18.4, and the RD stated that the weight loss had not been addressed promptly.
Failure to Follow Respiratory and Oxygen Orders
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide respiratory care consistent with physician orders for a resident with a tracheostomy and severe cognitive impairment. The resident was admitted with traumatic subdural hemorrhage, acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia, and anoxic brain damage. The record showed orders for tracheostomy suctioning with pre- and post-assessment documentation of lung sounds, heart rate, respirations, and secretion characteristics, and the care plan directed monitoring and documentation of respiratory status and trach care. However, the Treatment Administration Record for the month reviewed contained no documentation of the required pre- and post-suction assessments. During an observed tracheostomy care session, an LPN performed hand hygiene, donned PPE, and completed trach care, but did not perform a respiratory assessment before or after suctioning. The resident began coughing and expelling secretions during collar change, and the LPN performed deep suctioning and mouth suctioning, then left the room without completing the assessment. When interviewed, the LPN stated she knew a respiratory assessment should include oxygen, lung sounds, and respirations, and said she would normally do one for trach care, but explained she forgot her stethoscope and pulse oximeter and was nervous and rushed. The facility also failed to assure oxygen therapy was provided in accordance with orders for another resident. That resident had diagnoses including acute and chronic respiratory failure, COPD, morbid obesity, shortness of breath, and pleural effusion, and the chart contained no current physician order for oxygen therapy even though the care plan addressed oxygen use and monitoring for respiratory distress. The resident was observed using oxygen via nasal cannula and portable tank, while the concentrator was running above the highest marked flow setting. Staff stated the resident used oxygen most of the time, but the nurse and ADON could not locate an active oxygen order and noted oxygen orders had been discontinued in July 2025.
Missing Dialysis Communication Sheets
Penalty
Summary
Safe, appropriate dialysis care/services were not provided for a resident who required dialysis when the facility failed to obtain dialysis communication sheets for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for dialysis. The resident was readmitted with diagnoses of End Stage Renal Disease and was dependent on dialysis. The physician's orders directed dialysis on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, and the resident's nutrition risk assessment noted hyponatremia and fluid fluctuations anticipated secondary to dialysis. The care plan included collaboration with the dialysis center as an intervention. A review of the dialysis communication sheets kept in the nurse's station showed missing sheets for several dialysis dates, and those sheets were not in the dialysis binder. Facility staff stated that the communication sheets are completed before the resident goes to dialysis, completed by the dialysis center, returned with the resident, reviewed by nursing for new orders or fluid restrictions, and then placed in the dialysis binder the same day. The DON stated that it is essential to review all communication sheets the same day after residents return from dialysis.
Failure to Identify PTSD Triggers and Implement Trauma-Informed Care Plan
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to identify triggers and implement care plans with triggers for a resident diagnosed with PTSD. The resident’s psychosocial history and assessment documented that he had been diagnosed with PTSD, that he had a trigger or flashback sensation, and that being in situations where he feels anxiety caused flashbacks or triggers, with increased anxiety noted when a trigger occurred. His MDS assessment documented a BIMS score of 15, indicating intact cognitive response, and his care plan included a focus on trauma informed care with interventions to know what triggers are and minimize exposure if possible and to observe for reported symptoms of a trigger. During interviews, the Social Services Director stated that PTSD triggers were addressed on the admission psychosocial assessment and that the trauma informed care portion would automatically pull over to the care plan. She identified the resident’s trigger as being in situations where he feels anxiety and described using a calm, delicate, quiet approach. The Psychologist stated the resident had mentioned yelling as something he did not like and that it made him anxious, and that staff had been informed and the resident’s room or roommate had been changed a couple of times, which helped him. Despite these discussions, the report states the facility failed to identify triggers and implement care plans with triggers for the resident.
Medication Reconciliation Failure for Controlled Drug
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure adequate medication for one resident, who was admitted with diagnoses including Parkinson's disease and dementia, during medication reconciliation. Review of the physician's order showed Alprazolam 0.25 mg, a controlled drug, was ordered as needed for anxiety/agitation for 14 days and later discontinued. However, the controlled drug declining inventory sheet documented the Alprazolam was signed out at 8:24 PM, while review of the MAR from 07/01/25 through the review date showed no documentation that the medication was administered, and the nurse progress notes also contained no documentation of administration. During interview, the DON stated she regularly reviews carts with nurses to ensure expired or discontinued medications are removed, and acknowledged the Alprazolam was discontinued and was not documented as being administered.
Medications Left at Resident Bedside
Penalty
Summary
Medication storage was not maintained in accordance with accepted professional principles for one sampled resident. Resident #99 was admitted with diagnoses including cerebral infarction due to embolism of the left middle cerebral artery, other lack of coordination, and aphasia. The resident’s MDS documented that a Brief Interview of Mental Status could not be conducted because the resident was rarely or never understood. The physician’s orders contained no order for ointments or gels to be applied topically, and the record showed no assessment for self-administration of medications. During observation, two over-the-counter medications, Ultra Strength Muscle Rub and triple antibiotic ointment, were found on the resident’s overbed table next to the resident while she was sitting beside it. When asked about the creams, the resident indicated she used them and demonstrated applying them to her left arm and right leg. Staff later confirmed that residents are not supposed to have medications at the bedside, and a side-by-side observation with the RN/UM again found triple antibiotic ointment on the resident’s overbed table, which the RN/UM acknowledged.
Failure to Follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions
Penalty
Summary
Failure to provide and implement an effective infection prevention and control program was identified when staff did not follow enhanced barrier precautions for one resident on enhanced barrier precautions. The resident had diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy and a foot ulcer, and the quarterly MDS documented a BIMS score of 12, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The resident also had a physician order for enhanced barrier precautions and a care plan that included enhanced barrier precautions for a diabetic ulcer of the left medial foot. During an observation, staff entered the resident’s room, washed their hands, put on gloves, and dressed the resident, then transferred the resident from bed to wheelchair and took the resident to the bathroom. The resident urinated on the wheelchair, and staff then returned the resident to the room, took vital signs, transferred the resident back to bed, and provided care. Staff K, Staff L, Staff M, and Staff N did not wear the required PPE during these high-contact care activities. The DON stated staff would use PPE consisting of gloves and a gown during ADL care, toileting, and transfers, while Staff K stated a gown and gloves were required when caring for or transferring the resident, and Staff O stated enhanced barrier precautions meant wearing a gown and gloves when entering the room because the resident could have wounds or other conditions.
Failure to Provide Ordered Flu and Pneumococcal Vaccines
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations for 2 of 5 sampled residents, including a resident with muscle wasting and atrophy and pneumonia and another resident with COPD, acute pulmonary edema, allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis, morbid obesity, and a presence of a heart assist device. Record review showed both residents had cognitive responses documented on the MDS, and physician orders were entered for the influenza vaccine for one resident and Prevnar 20 for the other. The records also included vaccine consent forms and declination forms with conflicting documentation, including signed consents indicating the residents wanted the vaccines and declination forms that were either signed or not signed, with one form containing a handwritten notation of refusal that did not appear to match the resident's handwriting. For one resident, the Unit Manager/Infection Preventionist stated she had asked the resident if he wanted the influenza vaccine and showed a fax sent to the pharmacy ordering it. For the other resident, the Unit Manager/Infection Preventionist stated she had asked the resident if he wanted the pneumococcal vaccine and showed a signed consent form documenting Prevnar 20. During interview, the Unit Manager/Infection Preventionist stated immunizations are offered on admission and annually during September. When interviewed, one resident stated he always took the flu vaccine and believed he should take the pneumonia vaccine because he had had pneumonia before, but he did not remember staff offering either vaccine.
Inaccurate Medical Record Documentation and Communication Failure
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain accurate and professionally documented medical records for one resident. The resident, who had a history of traumatic cerebral hemorrhage and severe cognitive impairment (BIMS score of 4), was admitted and later readmitted to the facility. The clinical record showed discrepancies in documentation, including a physician order for foley catheter removal and a treatment administration record indicating the catheter was removed. However, subsequent urology nurse practitioner (NP) consult notes repeatedly documented male genitalia assessments for a female resident and indicated the presence of a foley catheter after it had been removed. The NP confirmed during interviews that these entries were incorrect and that the resident was female, acknowledging that the male-specific information should not have been included. Additionally, the NP stated that he had not communicated with the resident's family or representative regarding significant findings, such as a right kidney mass identified on ultrasound, despite the resident's severe cognitive impairment. The NP admitted that he typically only contacts family if the resident is alert and did not reach out to the family or representative in this case. These actions and omissions resulted in medical records that were not accurately documented in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices.
Failure to Maintain Current Physician Order and Timely Dressing Change for Access Device
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to obtain a current physician order and did not change the dressing on a resident's right upper access device as required by policy and physician orders. Review of the facility's policy indicated that central access device dressings must be changed every seven days or sooner if compromised, and that a sterile dressing must be maintained. However, for one resident, there was no current physician order for the right upper access device following re-admission, and the dressing was not changed or documented as changed for an extended period. The last documented order for the dressing change had been discontinued, and there was no updated order upon the resident's re-admission. Observations revealed that the dressing on the resident's right Opti Flow port double lumen was outdated, and staff confirmed it had not been changed as required. Documentation in the Medication Administration Record (MAR) and Treatment Administration Record (TAR) was inconsistent or missing regarding dressing changes, and there was no nursing progress note describing the site status or skin condition under the outdated dressing. The DON acknowledged that the dressing should have been changed and a current physician order should have been in place, as per protocol.
Plan Of Correction
1.) Resident #4's access change was completed per Physician's order. The Attending Physician was notified, care plan was added, and an assessment was completed by RN Unit Manager, with no negative effects noted. 2.) Full house audit of residents with access site and skin checks were completed by the Director of Nursing/Designee and no other concerns identified. 3.) Licensed Nurses educated by Director of Nursing/Designee on providing adequate care and services in accordance with accepted professional standards to include following Physicians' orders, changing of access, and the components of regulation F694/N201. 4.) Director of Nursing/Designee will conduct random audits to ensure access are changed per physician's order twice weekly for four weeks, then weekly for four weeks then monthly for three months to ensure compliance. Findings of audits to be reported through the monthly Quality Assessment, Assurance and Compliance Committee meeting for three months for comments and recommendations.
Failure to Maintain Current Orders and Timely Dressing Changes for Access Device
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to obtain a current physician order and did not change the dressing on a resident's right upper access device as required by policy and physician orders. The policy specified that central access device dressings must be changed every seven days or sooner if compromised, and that a current physician order should be maintained. However, review of the resident's records revealed there was no current physician order for the right upper access device following the resident's re-admission. Additionally, the dressing on the resident's right Opti Flow port double lumen was observed to be outdated, and documentation did not show that it had been changed or assessed as required. The resident involved had multiple diagnoses, including conditions affecting the right dominant side, type II diabetes, and hypertensive heart disease, and was noted to have severe cognitive impairment. Observations confirmed the outdated dressing, and interviews with nursing staff and the DON acknowledged that the dressing had not been changed or documented according to protocol. There was also a lack of documentation in the care plan and treatment records regarding the site status or condition of the skin under the dressing.
Plan Of Correction
1.) Resident #4's access change was completed per Physician's order. The Attending Physician was notified, the care plan was added, and an assessment was completed by RN Unit Manager, with no negative effects noted. 2.) Full house audit of residents with access site and skin checks were completed by the Director of Nursing/Designee and no other concerns identified. 3.) Licensed Nurses educated by Director of Nursing/Designee on providing adequate care and services in accordance with accepted professional standards to include following Physicians' orders, changing of access, and the components of regulation F694/N201. 4.) Director of Nursing/Designee will conduct random audits to ensure access are changed per physician's order twice weekly for four weeks, then weekly for four weeks then monthly for three months to ensure compliance. Findings of audits to be reported through the monthly Quality Assessment, Assurance and Compliance Committee meeting for three months for comments and recommendations. F 694 F 694
Failure to Post Current Nurse Staffing Information
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the daily Nurse Staffing Information was posted with the current date in two of five observed posting areas. During an entrance tour, surveyors observed that the 'Nursing Staff Posting Form' at both the front desk and the main hallway bulletin board displayed outdated dates, despite the form itself indicating it should be updated daily. Photographic evidence was obtained to document these findings. Interviews with staff revealed that the Staffing Coordinator prepared the next day's staffing form in advance and placed it behind the current day's form, with the expectation that the night nurse would update the posting at midnight. However, on the day of the survey, the previous day's forms remained posted in both observed areas. Both the Administrator and the DON acknowledged that the Nurse Staffing Information Form is required to be posted daily with the current date.
Plan Of Correction
1.) Staff posting was completed by the Staffing Coordinator, the Resident Council President was notified, and no additional recommendations were provided on behalf of the resident council committee. 2.) A full house audit of staff posting areas was completed by the Nursing Home Administrator, and staff posting was updated. A resident council meeting was held; no residents were affected by this. 3.) Staffing coordinator educated by the Nursing Home Administrator/Designee on updating the staff posting throughout the facility each day, and the components of regulation F732/N066. 4.) Nursing Home Administrator/Designee will conduct random audits to ensure staff posting is current, accurate, and visible to the residents twice weekly for four weeks, then weekly for four weeks then monthly for three months to ensure compliance. Findings of audits to be reported through the monthly Quality Assessment, Assurance and Compliance Committee meeting for three months for comments and recommendations.
Failure to Post Current Nurse Staffing Information
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the current date was posted on the Nurse Staffing Information forms in two of five observed posting areas. During an entrance tour, surveyors observed that the 'Nursing Staff Posting Form' at the front desk and in the main hallway near the conference room displayed outdated information, as confirmed by photographic evidence. The forms are required to be updated daily with the current date, but the previous day's forms remained posted in both locations. Interviews with staff revealed that the staffing coordinator would prepare the next day's posting in advance and place it behind the current day's form, with the expectation that the night nurse would switch the postings at midnight. However, this process was not followed, resulting in outdated staffing information being displayed. Both the Administrator and the DON acknowledged that the Nurse Staffing Information Form must be posted daily with the current date, but this requirement was not met at the time of the survey.
Plan Of Correction
1.) Staff posting was completed by the Staffing Coordinator, the Resident Council President was notified, and no additional recommendations were provided on behalf of the resident council committee. 2.) A full house audit of staff posting areas was completed by the Nursing Home Administrator, and staff posting was updated. A resident council meeting was held; no residents were affected by this. 3.) Staffing coordinator educated by the Nursing Home Administrator/Designee on updating the staff posting throughout the facility each day, and the components of regulation F732/N066. 4.) Nursing Home Administrator/Designee will conduct random audits to ensure staff posting is current, accurate, and visible to the residents twice weekly for four weeks, then weekly for four weeks then monthly for three months to ensure compliance. Findings of audits to be reported through the monthly Quality Assessment, Assurance and Compliance Committee meeting for three months for comments and recommendations.
Failure to Maintain a Clean and Homelike Environment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for one of its wings, specifically the [NAME] wing. On 05/28/24, an observation in Resident #67's room revealed an offensive urine-like odor. Both the Housekeeping Manager and District Housekeeping Manager acknowledged the odor during a side-by-side observation. The Housekeeping Manager mentioned that CNAs inform them when rooms have odors, and they use deodorizers and clean the rooms as necessary. The District Housekeeping Manager stated that they were aware of other rooms with similar issues and would add Resident #67's room to their focus cleaning list. Additionally, on 05/30/24, an overwhelming smell of urine was noted in the hallway between rooms 60 to 62. Staff E, a CNA, mentioned that Resident #67 often urinates on the floor, and she covers it with a sheet before calling housekeeping to clean it up. The District Manager of Housekeeping, who has worked for the company for [AGE] years, acknowledged the strong urine-like odor in the hallway and attributed it to the incontinence and behavior issues of the residents in those rooms. He mentioned that housekeeping cleans the rooms several times a day using enzyme cleaners. The Housekeeping Manager, with five years of experience at the facility, also acknowledged the ongoing issue and stated that they clean the affected resident rooms at least three times a day. Despite these efforts, the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, and homelike environment in the [NAME] wing, as evidenced by the persistent offensive odors.
Failure to Document and Investigate Injury of Unknown Origin
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly document and thoroughly investigate an injury of unknown origin for a resident with severe cognitive impairment. The resident was observed with a bruise around her right eye, but there was no documentation of a fall event or report of the bruise in the nurse progress notes or weekly skin assessments. The resident could not recall the cause of the bruise, and staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in reporting and documentation of the incident. The Director of Nursing (DON) and other staff members acknowledged that the incident was not documented or reported as required by the facility's Abuse Prevention Program policy. The floor nurse who discovered the resident's injury did not file an incident report or document the event in the nurse progress notes. Additionally, the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) on duty at the time of the incident did not document the event or follow up on the injury. Interviews with various staff members, including the Unit Manager, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), and another LPN, revealed a lack of communication and proper documentation regarding the resident's injury. The facility's failure to document and investigate the injury of unknown origin is a deficiency in their compliance with the Abuse Prevention Program policy, which requires thorough investigation and appropriate reporting of such incidents.
Failure to Develop Comprehensive Care Plans for Psychotropic Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to initiate a comprehensive care plan for psychotropic medications with measurable objectives and interventions for two residents. Resident #40, who was admitted with diagnoses including Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Depression, Chronic Pain Syndrome, and Paraplegia, was on multiple psychotropic medications such as Morphine Sulfate, Duloxetine HCl, and Alprazolam. Despite the physician's orders for monitoring side effects, the care plan for Resident #40 did not include measurable objectives and interventions for these medications. This was confirmed during an interview with the Clinical Record Director, who acknowledged the omission in the care plan. Similarly, Resident #63, who was admitted with diagnoses including Dementia, Psychosis, and a history of falls, was prescribed Olanzapine for Psychosis. The care plan for Resident #63 included monitoring for side effects of antianxiety medication but failed to address the antipsychotic medication. Interviews with care plan coordinators and the Director of Nursing confirmed that the care plan should have been updated to reflect the use of Olanzapine. Both cases highlight the facility's failure to develop and implement comprehensive care plans for residents on psychotropic medications.
Failure to Follow Wound Care Protocols and Ensure Functioning Equipment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents receive wound care consistent with professional standards of practice for a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, including a sacral pressure ulcer. During an observation, it was noted that the resident's air loss mattress, which was supposed to be on, was turned off, and staff were unaware of how long it had been off. This is critical as the mattress is part of the resident's care plan to manage the pressure ulcer. Additionally, the wound care procedure performed by an LPN was not in compliance with the facility's protocol. The LPN did not change gloves between cleaning the resident's bottom and applying treatment to the wound, which is against the documented procedure for clean dressing changes and could lead to contamination and infection. The LPN admitted to not following the protocol due to nervousness in the presence of a supervisor. The DON was informed of these findings and acknowledged the issue. The resident involved had a significant medical history, including cachexia, adult failure to thrive, peripheral vascular diseases, and chronic pain syndrome. The resident was dependent on staff for most activities of daily living, including personal care. The failure to follow proper wound care procedures and ensure the air loss mattress was functioning as required directly impacted the resident's care. The facility's documented procedures for wound care were not adhered to, leading to potential risks for the resident's health and well-being.
Improper Catheter Care and Handling
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper indwelling catheter care for a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple medical conditions, including obstructive uropathy and chronic kidney disease. The resident's care plan specified the use of a 16 French catheter with a 10 cc balloon, and the physician's order required the urinary drainage bag to be labeled with the date. However, observations revealed that the resident had an 18 French catheter with a 30 cc balloon, and the urinary drainage bag was not dated. Additionally, the catheter tubing was not anchored to the resident's thigh, and the drainage bag was placed on top of the bed during care, which is against standard practice to prevent urinary tract infections. The resident's urine was observed to be cloudy, indicating potential infection or improper care. Staff interviews confirmed that the catheter tubing was not consistently anchored, and the urinary drainage bag was improperly handled during care. The staff member performing the care admitted to placing the drainage bag on the bed, which is not recommended as it can lead to infections. The unit manager acknowledged the issues but did not provide a consistent rationale for the improper practices. The resident's severe cognitive impairment limited their ability to communicate effectively, further emphasizing the need for diligent and proper care by the staff. The facility's failure to adhere to the care plan and physician's orders, along with improper handling of the catheter and drainage bag, led to the identified deficiencies in the resident's care.
Failure to Provide Timely Nutritional Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide timely nutritional interventions for a resident with severe cognitive impairment. The resident, who was admitted with diagnoses including Dementia and Psychosis, experienced a significant weight loss over several months. Despite recommendations from the clinical dietitian for fortified cereal and nutritional supplements, there was no follow-up nutritional assessment after the initial evaluation in January. The resident's weight continued to decline, and no further assessments or interventions were documented to address this issue. The clinical dietitian acknowledged that the quarterly follow-up assessment for the resident was missed due to an error in the electronic system. The resident's meal intake records showed inconsistent consumption, with some meals being consumed at less than 50%. The lack of timely reassessment and intervention contributed to the resident's continued weight loss, highlighting a deficiency in the facility's nutritional care processes.
Medication Management and Documentation Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure accurate reconciliation of controlled substance medications for several residents. For Resident #48, the facility did not renew a physician's order for Ativan, leading to the administration of the medication without a valid order. Additionally, the Controlled Drug Declining Inventory Sheet did not match the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for multiple dates, indicating discrepancies in documentation. Similar issues were observed for Resident #82, where the administration of Lorazepam was not properly documented on the MAR, despite being removed from the controlled substances box. The DON acknowledged these discrepancies during a side-by-side review of the records. Resident #93 received Alprazolam without a valid physician's order for several months. The Controlled Drug Declining Inventory Sheet and the MAR did not match, indicating that the medication was administered without proper documentation. The DON admitted that the psychotropic medication was missed during their regular meetings and that the medication was given without a valid order. For Resident #117, the facility failed to properly document the disposal of Lorazepam tablets, as the required two nurse signatures were missing. Additionally, the MAR did not reflect the administration of the medication on several dates, despite it being removed from the controlled substances box. Resident #83 did not receive their prescribed Zofran medication for nausea and vomiting due to it not being available. The resident reported missing the medication for a couple of days, which was confirmed by the MAR and interviews with staff. Lastly, Resident #6 did not receive their prescribed Bupropion medication, although the MAR was signed as if it had been administered. These deficiencies highlight significant issues in medication management and documentation within the facility, affecting multiple residents and various types of medications.
Failure to Address PRN Psychotropic Medications Timely
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to address physician-ordered 'As Needed' (PRN) psychotropic medications that had 'no stop date' in a timely manner for three residents. The facility's policy required PRN antipsychotic medications to be discontinued after 14 days unless the prescriber documented the rationale for continued use. However, this policy was not followed for Residents #48, #82, and #99, all of whom were on hospice care and had PRN orders for Lorazepam without a stop date or proper documentation for continued use beyond 14 days. Resident #99 was admitted with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, including dementia and anxiety disorder. The resident had PRN orders for Lorazepam, both oral and injectable, which were administered multiple times without a stop date or documented rationale for continued use. Despite pharmacy recommendations to evaluate the need for continued PRN use, the physician's response indicated that medications were managed by hospice, and no further action was taken to comply with the facility's policy. Resident #48, who had severe cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff for daily activities, also had a PRN order for Lorazepam without a stop date. The medication was administered multiple times beyond the 14-day limit without a renewed physician order. Similarly, Resident #82, with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, had a PRN order for Lorazepam via G-tube, which was administered beyond the 14-day limit without a renewed order. Interviews with staff, including the Director of Nursing and a Licensed Practical Nurse, revealed a misunderstanding that hospice care exempted residents from the 14-day limit for PRN psychotropic medications, leading to non-compliance with the facility's policy.
Medication Storage and Security Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain medications and medication carts in a secure and sanitary manner. During a medication administration observation, a staff member left a medication cart unlocked and unattended for approximately 7 minutes while speaking to another staff member. There were residents and staff members passing by the unlocked cart during this time. In another instance, a medication cart was found unattended and unlocked outside a resident's room. The staff member responsible for the cart acknowledged leaving it unlocked but was unsure how it happened. Additionally, an expired eye drop bottle was found in a medication cart, which had been removed from a resident's room but not disposed of properly. Loose pills were also found in the medication carts during reviews, which staff members acknowledged should not have been there. The facility's policies on medication storage and administration were not followed, leading to these deficiencies. The policies require medications to be stored properly and medication carts to be kept closed and locked when out of sight of the medication nurse. The facility's Director of Nursing was informed of these findings. The observations and interviews revealed lapses in maintaining the security and sanitation of medication carts, as well as the proper disposal of expired medications.
Failure to Follow Menu Nutritional Requirements
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow their menus to meet the nutritional needs of the residents. During an observation in the main kitchen, it was found that the corned beef served on a regular diet plate was only 1 ounce, instead of the 3 ounces specified in the facility's menu. The Food Service Manager instructed the cook to place two pieces of corned beef on each plate, which still did not meet the required 3 ounces. This discrepancy was confirmed through interviews and record reviews, affecting 40 residents on a regular diet out of a total census of 124 residents.
Failure to Provide Correct Food Choices and Preferences
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide food choices and preferences for three residents during dining observations. Resident #28, who had an intact cognitive status, reported that her meal trays often contained incorrect food items. During an observation, her breakfast tray was missing the hard-boiled eggs listed on the meal ticket, leaving her without a protein option. Resident #64, also cognitively intact, did not receive salad dressing with her green salad as indicated on her meal ticket, resulting in her not eating the salad. Resident #110, with an intact cognitive status, did not receive fortified pudding or a mighty shake as specified on her meal ticket during lunch observation. Interviews with the facility's Registered Dietitian and Food Service Manager revealed that while tray audits are periodically conducted to ensure meal ticket accuracy, the Registered Dietitian is not present daily. The Food Service Manager stated that there is a designated person at the end of the tray line responsible for ensuring the food items match the printed meal tickets. Despite these measures, discrepancies in meal delivery were observed, leading to the deficiencies noted in the report.
Failure to Adhere to Fluid Restriction for Dialysis Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide the correct fluid restriction for a resident with End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) who was dependent on dialysis. The physician's orders specified a fluid restriction of 720 milliliters (ml) per day, with no water to be left at the bedside. However, during an observation, the resident was found with a lunch tray containing 24 ounces of fluids instead of the prescribed 8 ounces. Additionally, later in the day, the resident was observed with 16 ounces of water at the bedside, contrary to the physician's orders and care plan. The resident, who had moderate cognitive impairment, was unaware of her fluid restriction. Interviews with staff revealed that Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) were responsible for providing water to residents and were supposed to check the electronic system for any fluid restrictions. The Registered Nurse stated that the nurse assigned to the resident would also inform the CNAs about any fluid restrictions. Despite this, the resident received more fluids than prescribed, indicating a failure in communication and adherence to the care plan. The CNA interviewed was aware of the fluid restriction but did not provide the extra water, suggesting a lapse in protocol by another staff member.
Food Service Safety Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. During an initial visit to the main kitchen, several concerns were observed, including open garbage cans in the food production area, debris and dirt on the floor around the food production area and behind the stove, and improperly labeled or dated food containers in the reach-in refrigerator. The internal temperatures of the reach-in refrigerator were also noted to be above the recommended 40 degrees Fahrenheit, with readings of 51 and 55 degrees Fahrenheit. Additionally, the walk-in refrigerator contained food items that were past their used-by dates, including ravioli and ground beef, and a plastic container labeled beef with a preparation and used-by date of the same day. The dry storage area had boxes of food items placed on the floor, which is against food safety standards. Furthermore, a dietary aide was observed working on the breakfast tray line and plating food items with bare hands. The aide then adjusted his glasses and continued plating food without washing his hands first. These observations were communicated to the Food Service Manager during an interview. The facility's failure to adhere to professional standards for food service safety was evident in the improper storage, labeling, and handling of food, as well as the lack of proper hygiene practices by staff.
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 248 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 2 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 Pompano Beach
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deerfield Beach Health And Rehabilitation Center | 0.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 1 | 0 |
| Aviata At The Sea - Pompano Beach | 3.2 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Childrens Comprehensive Care Center Inc | 3.3 mi | ★★★★★ | 2 | 0 |
| John Knox Village Of Pompano Beach | 3.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 0 | 0 |
| Solaris Healthcare Coconut Creek | 3.7 mi | ★★★★★ | 6 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Pompano Health And Rehabilitation Center.
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.