FloridaMiami

St Annes Nursing Center, St Annes Residence INC

11855 Quail Roost Drive, Miami, FL 33177 · Miami-Dade County · 213 certified beds · avg 195 residents/day · certified since May 22, 1987

Abuse citation flag (CMS)

The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
2
Serious findings on record
$34,141
Fines, last 3 years
4.11
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5

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 self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Nov 13, 2025 · 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 (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Jan 19, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Nov 13, 2025 · 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Jan 13, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (18)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Nov 13, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe 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
Nov 13, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe 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
Sep 18, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Sep 18, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Apr 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Apr 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections.
Apr 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them.
Apr 10, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint
Nov 9, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Oct 28, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician.
Oct 28, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Oct 28, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep all essential equipment working safely — things like heating and cooling systems, kitchen equipment, and medical devices.
Oct 28, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Oct 28, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 7).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202250E
202320D
2025112G ▲

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.

Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)

3 fines totaling $34,141.

DateTypeAmount / length
Nov 13, 2025Fine$26,685
Nov 9, 2023Fine$3,728
Nov 9, 2023Fine$3,728

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

MeasureThis facilityFlorida avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.114.033.95top 31% in Florida; top 35% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.030.760.69top 17% in Florida; top 14% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.803.683.50top 29% in Florida; top 29% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.720.530.48top 19% in Florida; top 15% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)25.841.445.8top 14% in Florida; top 8% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)23.746.042.9top 13% in Florida; top 20% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, 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 3.97, RN 1.00, weekend 3.66. Staffing rating: 5/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5

Who owns this facility

Non profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Archdiocese of Miami INCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest100%12/05/1984
St. Anne's Nursing Center, St Anne's Residence INCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%12/05/1984
Cabezas, SandraIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE05/17/2019
Cabezas, SandraIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/03/2026
Fernandez, HeribertoIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2024
Fernandez, HeribertoIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/03/2026
Frick, MaryIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2024
Wilson, LauraIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2024

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
South Dade Nursing and Rehabilitation Center3.0 miMiami, FL★★★★★4/5
East Ridge Rehabilitation and Nursing Center3.2 miCutler Bay, FL★★★★★4/5
Coral Reef Subacute Care Center LLC3.4 miMiami, FL★★★☆☆2/5
Jackson Memorial Perdue Medical Center3.6 miCutler Bay, FL★★★★★4/5
Kendall Lakes Healthcare and Rehab Center4.1 miMiami, FL★★★★★5/5
Nspire Healthcare Kendall6.6 miKendall, FL★★★★★4/5
Palace at Kendall Nursing and Rehabilitation Cente7.0 miMiami, FL★★★★★4/5
Harmony Health Center7.1 miMiami, FL★★★★★5/5
Homestead Manor a Palace Community9.5 miHomestead, FL★★★★★5/5
Brookwood Gardens Rehabilitation and Nursing Cente9.9 miHomestead, FL★★☆☆☆1/5
Riviera Health Resort10.2 miCoral Gables, FL★★★★★5/5
West Gables Health Care Center11.7 miMiami, FL★★★★★4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Miami →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 105560.