3855 Old Canoe Creek Road, Saint Cloud, FL 34769 (opens Google Maps) · Osceola County · (407) 957-2280· 120 certified beds · avg 116 residents/day · certified since Feb 24, 1986 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
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 →
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · how star ratings work →
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.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Dec 9, 2021 · F-0656
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.
Why it matters: Without a complete, working care plan, important needs can slip through the cracks and no one is accountable for results.
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: Jan 5, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Dec 9, 2021 · F-0689
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: Jan 5, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jul 24, 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 (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: Aug 24, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 16 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. F-0694
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
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 5, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 24, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · F-0694 |
| Apr 24, 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 |
| Jul 24, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, 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 |
| May 31, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, 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 |
| Aug 24, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Aug 24, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. · F-0865 |
| Aug 24, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · from a complaint · F-0582 |
| Dec 9, 2021 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 |
| Dec 9, 2021 | ▲ 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. · F-0689 |
| Dec 9, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Dec 9, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Dec 9, 2021 | 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 |
| Dec 9, 2021 | 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 |
| Dec 9, 2021 | 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 |
| Dec 9, 2021 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · F-0732 |
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (2 → 2).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 8 | 2 | J ▲ |
| 2023 | 3 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 2 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 3 | 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.
How to file a complaint about care →
1 fine totaling $8,512.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jul 24, 2024 | Fine | $8,512 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
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 | 0.59 | 0.76 | 0.69 | bottom 38% in Florida; top 49% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.82 | 3.68 | 3.50 | top 27% in Florida; top 29% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.27 | 0.53 | 0.48 | bottom 17% in Florida; bottom 26% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 42.3 | 41.4 | 45.8 | bottom 49% in Florida; top 42% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 65.2 | 46.0 | 42.9 | bottom 17% in Florida; bottom 15% 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 3.79, RN 0.54, weekend 3.45.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.79 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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.
Quality measures rating: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Terrace of St Cloud, the. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SC LTC Holdings LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 08/04/2017 |
| Tapia, Jill | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/18/2024 |
| Hernandez, Ruth | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/04/2024 |
| Hernandez, Ruth | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/04/2024 |
| Roth, Daniel | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/18/2024 |
| Roth, Daniel | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/18/2024 |
| SC LTC Holdings LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/01/2018 |
| Subhani, Noman | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2024 |
| Tapia, Jill | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/18/2024 |
| Tapia, Jill | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/18/2024 |
All 10 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Solaris Healthcare Osceola | 0.5 mi | Saint Cloud, FL | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Avante at St Cloud INC | 1.2 mi | Saint Cloud, FL | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Aviata at St Cloud | 1.4 mi | Saint Cloud, FL | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Kissimmee Health and Rehabilitation Center | 6.9 mi | Kissimmee, FL | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Good Samaritan Society-Kissimmee Village | 7.6 mi | Kissimmee, FL | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Terrace of Kissimmee, the | 7.8 mi | Kissimmee, FL | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Aviata at Kissimmee Gardens | 8.3 mi | Kissimmee, FL | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Kissimmee Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 8.4 mi | Kissimmee, FL | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Hunters Creek Nursing and Rehab Center | 10.9 mi | Orlando, FL | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Rehabilitation Center of Orlando | 14.3 mi | Orlando, FL | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Solaris Healthcare Celebration | 15.6 mi | Kissimmee, FL | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Davenport Nursing and Rehab Center | 18.1 mi | Davenport, FL | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 105528.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details