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: PALM GARDEN HEALTH AND REHABILITATION (14 facilities, chain avg rating 3.1★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Nov 7, 2024
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Sep 30, 2024
$73,226
Fines, last 3 years
4.19
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 · Jul 25, 2024 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
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: Jul 25, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Sep 30, 2024 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.
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: Oct 24, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 16 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign. F-0847
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 run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. F-0867
View all 16 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
Nov 7, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign. · F-0847
Nov 7, 2024
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
Nov 7, 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. · F-0867
Sep 30, 2024
▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint · F-0684
Sep 30, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · from a complaint · F-0725
Sep 30, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not arrange hospice services for a resident who needed them, or help the resident move to a facility that could arrange hospice. Hospice provides comfort-focused care for people nearing the end of life. · from a complaint · F-0849
Jul 25, 2024
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Feb 16, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578
Feb 16, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604
Feb 16, 2023
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
Feb 16, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. · F-0645
Mar 25, 2021
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · F-0694
Mar 25, 2021
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Mar 25, 2021
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Mar 25, 2021
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · F-0677
Mar 25, 2021
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
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (4 → 3).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations:
5
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2023
All citations:
4
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2024
All citations:
7
Serious citations (G–L):
2
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2021
5
0
E
2023
4
0
D
2024
7
2
J ▲
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
Sep 30, 2024
Fine
$62,381
Jul 25, 2024
Fine
$10,845
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:
4.19
Florida average:
4.03
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.76
Florida average:
0.76
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
3.91
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)
4.19
4.03
3.95
top 27% in Florida; top 32% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.76
0.76
0.69
top 39% in Florida; top 31% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
3.91
3.68
3.50
top 21% in Florida; top 25% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.49
0.53
0.48
top 44% in Florida; top 34% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
38.1
41.4
45.8
top 40% in Florida; top 31% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
40.9
46.0
42.9
top 41% in Florida; top 49% 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 3.81, RN 0.69, weekend 3.56.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.81 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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 Palm Garden of Orlando. 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.
James O. McCarver Qtip Business Marital Trust U/A Dated June 22, 2001,
Organization
5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
—
12/23/2014
James O. McCarver Residuary Trust Share U/A Dated 06/22/2001
Organization
5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
—
12/23/2014
McCarver, Patsy
Individual
5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
—
11/01/2013
Palm Garden Healthcare Holdings, LLC
Organization
5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest
50%
11/01/2013
Patsy E. McCarver Trust U/A Dated June 22, 2001 as Amended, Patsy E
Organization
5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest
—
11/01/2013
Bomberger, Jeffrey
Individual
Corporate Officer
NOT APPLICABLE
10/01/2014
Chalmers, James
Individual
Corporate Officer
NOT APPLICABLE
01/01/2015
Greene, Robert
Individual
Corporate Officer
NOT APPLICABLE
10/01/2014
Hovey, Greg
Individual
Operational/Managerial Control
NOT APPLICABLE
05/05/2022
Hovey, Greg
Individual
ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
03/21/2025
James O. McCarver Qtip Business Marital Trust U/A Dated June 22, 2001,
Organization
ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
11/01/2013
Nuriel, Gabriel
Individual
Operational/Managerial Control
NOT APPLICABLE
09/01/2021
Nuriel, Gabriel
Individual
ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
03/21/2025
Palm Healthcare Management, LLC
Organization
ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
03/21/2025
Patsy E. McCarver Trust U/A Dated June 22, 2001 as Amended, Patsy E
Organization
ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
11/01/2013
Pgorl Re, LLC
Organization
5% or Greater Security Interest
NOT APPLICABLE
07/29/2024
Pgorl Re, LLC
Organization
ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
07/29/2024
Regions Bank
Organization
5% or Greater Mortgage Interest
NOT APPLICABLE
11/01/2013
Regions Bank
Organization
5% or Greater Security Interest
NOT APPLICABLE
11/01/2013
All 19 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 Palm Garden Health and Rehabilitation — 14 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 Orange, FL — 36 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.