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 →
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.
1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 9, 2026
6
Serious findings on record
most recent Apr 18, 2026
$13,335
Fines, last 3 years
3.53
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 · Apr 18, 2026 · F-0552 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand.
Why it matters: Residents can't make good decisions about their care if they don't know what's happening with their health.
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: May 7, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Apr 18, 2026 · 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: May 7, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Apr 18, 2026 · 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 (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: May 7, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Apr 18, 2026 · 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: May 7, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 18, 2026 · 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: May 7, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Nov 5, 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: Nov 15, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 29 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · from a complaintF-0552
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 complaintF-0600
J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 complaintF-0684
View all 29 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 18, 2026
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolated
The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · from a complaint · F-0552
Apr 18, 2026
▲ 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
Apr 18, 2026
▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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
Apr 18, 2026
▲ 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
Apr 18, 2026
▲ 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
Apr 9, 2026
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
Apr 9, 2026
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 9, 2026
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
Apr 9, 2026
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 15, 2025
F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
The facility did not dispose of garbage and refuse properly. · from a complaint · F-0814
May 15, 2025
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. · from a complaint · F-0812
May 15, 2025
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · from a complaint · F-0558
Nov 5, 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
Nov 5, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610
May 16, 2024
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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 16, 2024
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
May 16, 2024
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
May 16, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658
May 16, 2024
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
Feb 2, 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
Feb 2, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · F-0688
Feb 2, 2023
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
Feb 2, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
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. · F-0725
Feb 2, 2023
E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern
The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755
Feb 2, 2023
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences. · F-0553
Feb 2, 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
Feb 2, 2023
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
Feb 2, 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
Feb 2, 2023
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
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (5 → 4).
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations:
10
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2024
All citations:
7
Serious citations (G–L):
1
2025
All citations:
3
Serious citations (G–L):
0
2026
All citations:
9
Serious citations (G–L):
5
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2023
10
0
E
2024
7
1
G ▲
2025
3
0
F
2026
9
5
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
Nov 5, 2024
Fine
$4,017
Nov 5, 2024
Fine
$9,318
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:
3.53
Florida average:
4.03
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
0.48
Florida average:
0.76
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
3.41
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)
3.53
4.03
3.95
bottom 18% in Florida; bottom 38% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
0.48
0.76
0.69
bottom 19% in Florida; bottom 34% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
3.41
3.68
3.50
bottom 35% in Florida; top 47% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.41
0.53
0.48
bottom 44% in Florida; top 46% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
30.5
41.4
45.8
top 24% in Florida; top 15% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
43.8
46.0
42.9
top 45% in Florida; bottom 46% 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 3.14, RN 0.42, weekend 3.03.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.14 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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 Vista Manor Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center. 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.
CMS records place this facility in Brevard, FL — 21 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
Health inspection rating 1/5 · CMS overall 1/5 · ▲ FEDERAL ABUSE CITATION FLAG· Fines (3y): $13,335
Most serious findings on record:
▲ Apr 18, 2026 (F-0552, Immediate jeopardy, isolated): The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand.
▲ Apr 18, 2026 (F-0600, 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.
▲ Apr 18, 2026 (F-0684, Immediate jeopardy, isolated): The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Questions for the administrator:
☐ "How do you explain health changes and treatment options to residents and their families?"
☐ "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
☐ "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
☐ "How does your quality committee work, and can you give an example of a problem it recently identified and fixed?"
☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
☐ "How do you identify and arrange specialized services for residents with mental health conditions or disabilities?"
☐ "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
☐ "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Florida midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
☐ "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
☐ "CMS reports 31% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
☐ "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
While you're there, notice:
☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)
Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 105530 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)