Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
Part of chain: SIMCHA HYMAN & NAFTALI ZANZIPER (79 facilities, chain avg rating 2.6★)
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 10, 2025
5
Serious findings on record
most recent May 17, 2024
$125,355
Fines, last 3 years
3.93
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Sep 21, 2023 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.
Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.
Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Oct 6, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Sep 21, 2023 · F-0607 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection.
Why it matters: Without working prevention policies, mistreatment is more likely to happen and less likely to be caught.
Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Oct 6, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Sep 21, 2023 · F-0867 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them.
Why it matters: Without a working quality program, the same care problems tend to repeat instead of getting fixed.
Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Oct 6, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 17, 2024 · F-0624 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not properly prepare residents for a safe transfer or discharge. Before a resident leaves, the facility must get them ready and make sure the move is safe and orderly.
Why it matters: An unprepared discharge can send a resident somewhere unsafe or without the care arrangements they need.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Jun 17, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 17, 2024 · F-0660 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving.
Why it matters: Poor discharge planning can send a resident home or elsewhere without the support, equipment, or follow-up care they need.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Jun 17, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 22 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. F-0644
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. F-0684
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. F-0692
View all 22 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
Date
Severity
What the facility was cited for
Apr 10, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. · F-0644
Apr 10, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Apr 10, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Apr 10, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759
Apr 10, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761
Apr 10, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Dec 4, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint · F-0656
Dec 4, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · from a complaint · F-0867
May 17, 2024
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not properly prepare residents for a safe transfer or discharge. Before a resident leaves, the facility must get them ready and make sure the move is safe and orderly. · from a complaint · F-0624
May 17, 2024
▲ G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving. · from a complaint · F-0660
Sep 21, 2023
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600
Sep 21, 2023
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint · F-0607
Sep 21, 2023
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · from a complaint · F-0867
May 18, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
May 18, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802
May 18, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · F-0550
May 18, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · F-0656
May 18, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695
May 18, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759
May 18, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Sep 16, 2021
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices. · F-0908
Sep 16, 2021
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly. · F-0585
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (7 → 6).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations:
2
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2023
All citations:
10
Serious citations (G–L):
3
2024
All citations:
4
Serious citations (G–L):
2
2025
All citations:
6
Serious citations (G–L):
0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2021
2
0
F
2023
10
3
J ▲
2024
4
2
G ▲
2025
6
0
D
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
Date
Type
Amount / length
May 17, 2024
Fine
$8,400
May 17, 2024
Fine
$8,401
Sep 21, 2023
Fine
$108,554
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityFlorida averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
3.93
Florida average:
4.03
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.40
Florida average:
0.76
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
3.61
Florida average:
3.68
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
Florida avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
3.93
4.03
3.95
top 45% in Florida; top 43% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.40
0.76
0.69
bottom 8% in Florida; bottom 22% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
3.61
3.68
3.50
top 43% in Florida; top 37% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.18
0.53
0.48
bottom 4% in Florida; bottom 9% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
65.4
41.4
45.8
bottom 4% in Florida; bottom 9% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
71.4
46.0
42.9
bottom 11% in Florida; bottom 11% in the U.S.
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 3.53, RN 0.36, weekend 3.24.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.53 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Lilac at Bayview, the. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
All 6 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Simcha Hyman & Naftali Zanziper — 79 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
CMS records place this facility in St. Johns, FL — 8 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.