Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
A standard survey is most likely before around January 2027
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of June 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Pompano Health And Rehabilitation Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment, dependent for ADLs, was sent to the hospital after a fall. The POA reported being told by a UM that the facility would handle the resident’s return transport and call back, but no follow-up occurred and the POA paid $150 for transportation. Staff interviews revealed conflicting understandings of who was responsible for arranging and paying for the return. The POA also received a consolidated bill covering several prior months and requested a fully itemized statement with clear explanations of services. The BOM emailed a non-itemized bill, was unaware of the itemization request, and had no further contact with the POA, leaving the billing grievance unresolved.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment had medical records that contained repeated documentation errors, including male genitalia assessments for a female and incorrect foley catheter status. The NP also failed to communicate significant clinical findings to the resident's representative, resulting in records not maintained according to professional standards.
A resident with multiple medical conditions did not have a current physician order for a right upper access device following re-admission, and the dressing on the device was not changed or documented as changed according to facility policy. The outdated dressing was observed during survey, and staff confirmed it had not been changed as required. Documentation in the MAR and TAR was incomplete, and there was no nursing note describing the site status or skin condition under the dressing.
A resident with multiple medical conditions and severe cognitive impairment did not have a current physician order for a right upper access device, and the dressing on the device was not changed or documented as required by facility policy. The outdated dressing was observed during survey, and staff acknowledged the lapse in following protocol and documentation.
Surveyors found that the facility did not post the current date on Nurse Staffing Information forms in two observed areas, as required. Staff explained that the process relied on the night nurse to update postings at midnight, but the previous day's forms remained displayed. The Administrator and DON confirmed the requirement for daily, current postings.
Surveyors found that the facility did not post the current date on Nurse Staffing Information forms in two observed areas, leaving outdated staffing data visible. Staff interviews confirmed that the process for updating postings was not followed, and both the Administrator and DON acknowledged the requirement for daily updates was not met.
The facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and homelike environment in one of its wings. Persistent offensive urine-like odors were noted in Resident #67's room and the hallway between rooms 60 to 62. Despite cleaning efforts, the issue remained unresolved, impacting the comfort and safety of the residents.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment was found with a bruise around her right eye, but the facility failed to document and investigate the injury as required by their Abuse Prevention Program policy. Staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in reporting and documentation of the incident.
The facility failed to initiate comprehensive care plans with measurable objectives and interventions for two residents on psychotropic medications. One resident's care plan did not address multiple psychotropic medications, while another's care plan failed to include an antipsychotic medication. Staff interviews confirmed these omissions.
A facility failed to follow wound care protocols and ensure an air loss mattress was functioning for a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, including a sacral pressure ulcer. An LPN did not change gloves between cleaning the resident's bottom and applying treatment to the wound, and the air loss mattress was found turned off, with staff unaware of how long it had been off.
The facility failed to provide proper catheter care for a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple medical conditions. The resident had an incorrect catheter size, an undated urinary drainage bag, and the catheter tubing was not anchored. Additionally, the drainage bag was placed on the bed during care, contrary to standard practice. Staff interviews confirmed these improper practices, leading to deficiencies in the resident's care.
A resident with severe cognitive impairment experienced significant weight loss due to the facility's failure to provide timely nutritional interventions. Despite recommendations for fortified cereal and nutritional supplements, no follow-up assessments were conducted, and the resident's weight continued to decline.
The facility failed to ensure accurate reconciliation and documentation of controlled substances and other medications for multiple residents. Issues included administering medications without valid orders, discrepancies between the Controlled Drug Declining Inventory Sheet and the MAR, improper disposal of controlled substances, and unavailability of prescribed medications.
The facility failed to address PRN psychotropic medications with no stop date in a timely manner for three residents on hospice care, leading to non-compliance with the facility's policy requiring discontinuation or documented rationale for continued use beyond 14 days.
The facility failed to maintain medications and medication carts in a secure and sanitary manner. Staff left medication carts unlocked and unattended, and expired eye drops and loose pills were found in the carts. The facility's policies on medication storage and administration were not followed.
The facility failed to follow their menus to meet the nutritional needs of the residents. Corned beef served on a regular diet plate was only 1 ounce instead of the 3 ounces specified in the menu, affecting 40 residents.
The facility failed to provide correct food choices and preferences for three residents. One resident did not receive the protein listed on her breakfast tray, another did not get salad dressing, and a third did not receive fortified pudding or a mighty shake as specified on their meal tickets. Interviews revealed that while tray audits are conducted, discrepancies in meal delivery still occurred.
The facility failed to adhere to the fluid restriction for a resident with ESRD on dialysis. The resident was observed with more fluids than prescribed and water at the bedside, contrary to physician's orders and the care plan. Staff interviews indicated a lapse in communication and protocol adherence.
The facility failed to adhere to professional standards for food service safety, including improper storage, labeling, and handling of food, as well as poor hygiene practices by staff. Observations included open garbage cans, debris on the floor, improperly labeled food containers, and a dietary aide plating food with bare hands without washing them.
Failure to Resolve Grievances Related to Transportation and Billing
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to honor a resident representative’s grievances regarding transportation and billing. The resident, who had moderate cognitive impairment and required substantial to maximal assistance with ADLs, was sent to the hospital via 911 after a fall on 12/04/25. The resident’s POA reported that when the hospital contacted her about returning the resident to the facility, she called the facility and was told by the Unit Manager not to worry and that the facility would handle the transportation and call her back. The POA did not receive a follow-up call and ultimately paid $150.00 for the resident’s return transport. Interviews later showed differing understandings among staff: the UM stated she believed hospitals usually arrange return transportation and reported being told the resident’s insurance would not cover it, while the DON and Admissions Coordinator stated that Admissions is responsible for arranging returns and that, for this long-term care resident, the facility should have paid regardless of insurance. The facility also failed to adequately address the POA’s grievance regarding billing. The POA received a bill in November 2025 that included charges from August, September, and October and requested a complete itemized billing statement from the start of the resident’s stay, including a clear explanation of services rendered. The grievance record dated 12/16/25 documented this request. The Business Office Manager reported speaking with the POA by phone and emailing a copy of the bill on 11/19/25, but the attached billing statement was not itemized as requested. The BOM stated she was not aware that an itemized bill had been requested and confirmed she had no further contact with the POA after sending the non-itemized bill, leaving the POA’s specific grievance about itemization unresolved.
Inaccurate Medical Record Documentation and Communication Failure
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain accurate and professionally documented medical records for one resident. The resident, who had a history of traumatic cerebral hemorrhage and severe cognitive impairment (BIMS score of 4), was admitted and later readmitted to the facility. The clinical record showed discrepancies in documentation, including a physician order for foley catheter removal and a treatment administration record indicating the catheter was removed. However, subsequent urology nurse practitioner (NP) consult notes repeatedly documented male genitalia assessments for a female resident and indicated the presence of a foley catheter after it had been removed. The NP confirmed during interviews that these entries were incorrect and that the resident was female, acknowledging that the male-specific information should not have been included. Additionally, the NP stated that he had not communicated with the resident's family or representative regarding significant findings, such as a right kidney mass identified on ultrasound, despite the resident's severe cognitive impairment. The NP admitted that he typically only contacts family if the resident is alert and did not reach out to the family or representative in this case. These actions and omissions resulted in medical records that were not accurately documented in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices.
Failure to Maintain Current Physician Order and Timely Dressing Change for Access Device
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to obtain a current physician order and did not change the dressing on a resident's right upper access device as required by policy and physician orders. Review of the facility's policy indicated that central access device dressings must be changed every seven days or sooner if compromised, and that a sterile dressing must be maintained. However, for one resident, there was no current physician order for the right upper access device following re-admission, and the dressing was not changed or documented as changed for an extended period. The last documented order for the dressing change had been discontinued, and there was no updated order upon the resident's re-admission. Observations revealed that the dressing on the resident's right Opti Flow port double lumen was outdated, and staff confirmed it had not been changed as required. Documentation in the Medication Administration Record (MAR) and Treatment Administration Record (TAR) was inconsistent or missing regarding dressing changes, and there was no nursing progress note describing the site status or skin condition under the outdated dressing. The DON acknowledged that the dressing should have been changed and a current physician order should have been in place, as per protocol.
Plan Of Correction
1.) Resident #4's access change was completed per Physician's order. The Attending Physician was notified, care plan was added, and an assessment was completed by RN Unit Manager, with no negative effects noted. 2.) Full house audit of residents with access site and skin checks were completed by the Director of Nursing/Designee and no other concerns identified. 3.) Licensed Nurses educated by Director of Nursing/Designee on providing adequate care and services in accordance with accepted professional standards to include following Physicians' orders, changing of access, and the components of regulation F694/N201. 4.) Director of Nursing/Designee will conduct random audits to ensure access are changed per physician's order twice weekly for four weeks, then weekly for four weeks then monthly for three months to ensure compliance. Findings of audits to be reported through the monthly Quality Assessment, Assurance and Compliance Committee meeting for three months for comments and recommendations.
Failure to Maintain Current Orders and Timely Dressing Changes for Access Device
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to obtain a current physician order and did not change the dressing on a resident's right upper access device as required by policy and physician orders. The policy specified that central access device dressings must be changed every seven days or sooner if compromised, and that a current physician order should be maintained. However, review of the resident's records revealed there was no current physician order for the right upper access device following the resident's re-admission. Additionally, the dressing on the resident's right Opti Flow port double lumen was observed to be outdated, and documentation did not show that it had been changed or assessed as required. The resident involved had multiple diagnoses, including conditions affecting the right dominant side, type II diabetes, and hypertensive heart disease, and was noted to have severe cognitive impairment. Observations confirmed the outdated dressing, and interviews with nursing staff and the DON acknowledged that the dressing had not been changed or documented according to protocol. There was also a lack of documentation in the care plan and treatment records regarding the site status or condition of the skin under the dressing.
Plan Of Correction
1.) Resident #4's access change was completed per Physician's order. The Attending Physician was notified, the care plan was added, and an assessment was completed by RN Unit Manager, with no negative effects noted. 2.) Full house audit of residents with access site and skin checks were completed by the Director of Nursing/Designee and no other concerns identified. 3.) Licensed Nurses educated by Director of Nursing/Designee on providing adequate care and services in accordance with accepted professional standards to include following Physicians' orders, changing of access, and the components of regulation F694/N201. 4.) Director of Nursing/Designee will conduct random audits to ensure access are changed per physician's order twice weekly for four weeks, then weekly for four weeks then monthly for three months to ensure compliance. Findings of audits to be reported through the monthly Quality Assessment, Assurance and Compliance Committee meeting for three months for comments and recommendations. F 694 F 694
Failure to Post Current Nurse Staffing Information
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the daily Nurse Staffing Information was posted with the current date in two of five observed posting areas. During an entrance tour, surveyors observed that the 'Nursing Staff Posting Form' at both the front desk and the main hallway bulletin board displayed outdated dates, despite the form itself indicating it should be updated daily. Photographic evidence was obtained to document these findings. Interviews with staff revealed that the Staffing Coordinator prepared the next day's staffing form in advance and placed it behind the current day's form, with the expectation that the night nurse would update the posting at midnight. However, on the day of the survey, the previous day's forms remained posted in both observed areas. Both the Administrator and the DON acknowledged that the Nurse Staffing Information Form is required to be posted daily with the current date.
Plan Of Correction
1.) Staff posting was completed by the Staffing Coordinator, the Resident Council President was notified, and no additional recommendations were provided on behalf of the resident council committee. 2.) A full house audit of staff posting areas was completed by the Nursing Home Administrator, and staff posting was updated. A resident council meeting was held; no residents were affected by this. 3.) Staffing coordinator educated by the Nursing Home Administrator/Designee on updating the staff posting throughout the facility each day, and the components of regulation F732/N066. 4.) Nursing Home Administrator/Designee will conduct random audits to ensure staff posting is current, accurate, and visible to the residents twice weekly for four weeks, then weekly for four weeks then monthly for three months to ensure compliance. Findings of audits to be reported through the monthly Quality Assessment, Assurance and Compliance Committee meeting for three months for comments and recommendations.
Failure to Post Current Nurse Staffing Information
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that the current date was posted on the Nurse Staffing Information forms in two of five observed posting areas. During an entrance tour, surveyors observed that the 'Nursing Staff Posting Form' at the front desk and in the main hallway near the conference room displayed outdated information, as confirmed by photographic evidence. The forms are required to be updated daily with the current date, but the previous day's forms remained posted in both locations. Interviews with staff revealed that the staffing coordinator would prepare the next day's posting in advance and place it behind the current day's form, with the expectation that the night nurse would switch the postings at midnight. However, this process was not followed, resulting in outdated staffing information being displayed. Both the Administrator and the DON acknowledged that the Nurse Staffing Information Form must be posted daily with the current date, but this requirement was not met at the time of the survey.
Plan Of Correction
1.) Staff posting was completed by the Staffing Coordinator, the Resident Council President was notified, and no additional recommendations were provided on behalf of the resident council committee. 2.) A full house audit of staff posting areas was completed by the Nursing Home Administrator, and staff posting was updated. A resident council meeting was held; no residents were affected by this. 3.) Staffing coordinator educated by the Nursing Home Administrator/Designee on updating the staff posting throughout the facility each day, and the components of regulation F732/N066. 4.) Nursing Home Administrator/Designee will conduct random audits to ensure staff posting is current, accurate, and visible to the residents twice weekly for four weeks, then weekly for four weeks then monthly for three months to ensure compliance. Findings of audits to be reported through the monthly Quality Assessment, Assurance and Compliance Committee meeting for three months for comments and recommendations.
Failure to Maintain a Clean and Homelike Environment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for one of its wings, specifically the [NAME] wing. On 05/28/24, an observation in Resident #67's room revealed an offensive urine-like odor. Both the Housekeeping Manager and District Housekeeping Manager acknowledged the odor during a side-by-side observation. The Housekeeping Manager mentioned that CNAs inform them when rooms have odors, and they use deodorizers and clean the rooms as necessary. The District Housekeeping Manager stated that they were aware of other rooms with similar issues and would add Resident #67's room to their focus cleaning list. Additionally, on 05/30/24, an overwhelming smell of urine was noted in the hallway between rooms 60 to 62. Staff E, a CNA, mentioned that Resident #67 often urinates on the floor, and she covers it with a sheet before calling housekeeping to clean it up. The District Manager of Housekeeping, who has worked for the company for [AGE] years, acknowledged the strong urine-like odor in the hallway and attributed it to the incontinence and behavior issues of the residents in those rooms. He mentioned that housekeeping cleans the rooms several times a day using enzyme cleaners. The Housekeeping Manager, with five years of experience at the facility, also acknowledged the ongoing issue and stated that they clean the affected resident rooms at least three times a day. Despite these efforts, the facility failed to maintain a safe, clean, and homelike environment in the [NAME] wing, as evidenced by the persistent offensive odors.
Failure to Document and Investigate Injury of Unknown Origin
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to properly document and thoroughly investigate an injury of unknown origin for a resident with severe cognitive impairment. The resident was observed with a bruise around her right eye, but there was no documentation of a fall event or report of the bruise in the nurse progress notes or weekly skin assessments. The resident could not recall the cause of the bruise, and staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in reporting and documentation of the incident. The Director of Nursing (DON) and other staff members acknowledged that the incident was not documented or reported as required by the facility's Abuse Prevention Program policy. The floor nurse who discovered the resident's injury did not file an incident report or document the event in the nurse progress notes. Additionally, the Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) on duty at the time of the incident did not document the event or follow up on the injury. Interviews with various staff members, including the Unit Manager, Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON), and another LPN, revealed a lack of communication and proper documentation regarding the resident's injury. The facility's failure to document and investigate the injury of unknown origin is a deficiency in their compliance with the Abuse Prevention Program policy, which requires thorough investigation and appropriate reporting of such incidents.
Failure to Develop Comprehensive Care Plans for Psychotropic Medications
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to initiate a comprehensive care plan for psychotropic medications with measurable objectives and interventions for two residents. Resident #40, who was admitted with diagnoses including Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Depression, Chronic Pain Syndrome, and Paraplegia, was on multiple psychotropic medications such as Morphine Sulfate, Duloxetine HCl, and Alprazolam. Despite the physician's orders for monitoring side effects, the care plan for Resident #40 did not include measurable objectives and interventions for these medications. This was confirmed during an interview with the Clinical Record Director, who acknowledged the omission in the care plan. Similarly, Resident #63, who was admitted with diagnoses including Dementia, Psychosis, and a history of falls, was prescribed Olanzapine for Psychosis. The care plan for Resident #63 included monitoring for side effects of antianxiety medication but failed to address the antipsychotic medication. Interviews with care plan coordinators and the Director of Nursing confirmed that the care plan should have been updated to reflect the use of Olanzapine. Both cases highlight the facility's failure to develop and implement comprehensive care plans for residents on psychotropic medications.
Failure to Follow Wound Care Protocols and Ensure Functioning Equipment
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that residents receive wound care consistent with professional standards of practice for a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, including a sacral pressure ulcer. During an observation, it was noted that the resident's air loss mattress, which was supposed to be on, was turned off, and staff were unaware of how long it had been off. This is critical as the mattress is part of the resident's care plan to manage the pressure ulcer. Additionally, the wound care procedure performed by an LPN was not in compliance with the facility's protocol. The LPN did not change gloves between cleaning the resident's bottom and applying treatment to the wound, which is against the documented procedure for clean dressing changes and could lead to contamination and infection. The LPN admitted to not following the protocol due to nervousness in the presence of a supervisor. The DON was informed of these findings and acknowledged the issue. The resident involved had a significant medical history, including cachexia, adult failure to thrive, peripheral vascular diseases, and chronic pain syndrome. The resident was dependent on staff for most activities of daily living, including personal care. The failure to follow proper wound care procedures and ensure the air loss mattress was functioning as required directly impacted the resident's care. The facility's documented procedures for wound care were not adhered to, leading to potential risks for the resident's health and well-being.
Improper Catheter Care and Handling
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper indwelling catheter care for a resident with severe cognitive impairment and multiple medical conditions, including obstructive uropathy and chronic kidney disease. The resident's care plan specified the use of a 16 French catheter with a 10 cc balloon, and the physician's order required the urinary drainage bag to be labeled with the date. However, observations revealed that the resident had an 18 French catheter with a 30 cc balloon, and the urinary drainage bag was not dated. Additionally, the catheter tubing was not anchored to the resident's thigh, and the drainage bag was placed on top of the bed during care, which is against standard practice to prevent urinary tract infections. The resident's urine was observed to be cloudy, indicating potential infection or improper care. Staff interviews confirmed that the catheter tubing was not consistently anchored, and the urinary drainage bag was improperly handled during care. The staff member performing the care admitted to placing the drainage bag on the bed, which is not recommended as it can lead to infections. The unit manager acknowledged the issues but did not provide a consistent rationale for the improper practices. The resident's severe cognitive impairment limited their ability to communicate effectively, further emphasizing the need for diligent and proper care by the staff. The facility's failure to adhere to the care plan and physician's orders, along with improper handling of the catheter and drainage bag, led to the identified deficiencies in the resident's care.
Failure to Provide Timely Nutritional Interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide timely nutritional interventions for a resident with severe cognitive impairment. The resident, who was admitted with diagnoses including Dementia and Psychosis, experienced a significant weight loss over several months. Despite recommendations from the clinical dietitian for fortified cereal and nutritional supplements, there was no follow-up nutritional assessment after the initial evaluation in January. The resident's weight continued to decline, and no further assessments or interventions were documented to address this issue. The clinical dietitian acknowledged that the quarterly follow-up assessment for the resident was missed due to an error in the electronic system. The resident's meal intake records showed inconsistent consumption, with some meals being consumed at less than 50%. The lack of timely reassessment and intervention contributed to the resident's continued weight loss, highlighting a deficiency in the facility's nutritional care processes.
Medication Management and Documentation Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure accurate reconciliation of controlled substance medications for several residents. For Resident #48, the facility did not renew a physician's order for Ativan, leading to the administration of the medication without a valid order. Additionally, the Controlled Drug Declining Inventory Sheet did not match the Medication Administration Record (MAR) for multiple dates, indicating discrepancies in documentation. Similar issues were observed for Resident #82, where the administration of Lorazepam was not properly documented on the MAR, despite being removed from the controlled substances box. The DON acknowledged these discrepancies during a side-by-side review of the records. Resident #93 received Alprazolam without a valid physician's order for several months. The Controlled Drug Declining Inventory Sheet and the MAR did not match, indicating that the medication was administered without proper documentation. The DON admitted that the psychotropic medication was missed during their regular meetings and that the medication was given without a valid order. For Resident #117, the facility failed to properly document the disposal of Lorazepam tablets, as the required two nurse signatures were missing. Additionally, the MAR did not reflect the administration of the medication on several dates, despite it being removed from the controlled substances box. Resident #83 did not receive their prescribed Zofran medication for nausea and vomiting due to it not being available. The resident reported missing the medication for a couple of days, which was confirmed by the MAR and interviews with staff. Lastly, Resident #6 did not receive their prescribed Bupropion medication, although the MAR was signed as if it had been administered. These deficiencies highlight significant issues in medication management and documentation within the facility, affecting multiple residents and various types of medications.
Failure to Address PRN Psychotropic Medications Timely
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to address physician-ordered 'As Needed' (PRN) psychotropic medications that had 'no stop date' in a timely manner for three residents. The facility's policy required PRN antipsychotic medications to be discontinued after 14 days unless the prescriber documented the rationale for continued use. However, this policy was not followed for Residents #48, #82, and #99, all of whom were on hospice care and had PRN orders for Lorazepam without a stop date or proper documentation for continued use beyond 14 days. Resident #99 was admitted with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, including dementia and anxiety disorder. The resident had PRN orders for Lorazepam, both oral and injectable, which were administered multiple times without a stop date or documented rationale for continued use. Despite pharmacy recommendations to evaluate the need for continued PRN use, the physician's response indicated that medications were managed by hospice, and no further action was taken to comply with the facility's policy. Resident #48, who had severe cognitive impairment and was dependent on staff for daily activities, also had a PRN order for Lorazepam without a stop date. The medication was administered multiple times beyond the 14-day limit without a renewed physician order. Similarly, Resident #82, with severe cognitive impairment and multiple diagnoses, had a PRN order for Lorazepam via G-tube, which was administered beyond the 14-day limit without a renewed order. Interviews with staff, including the Director of Nursing and a Licensed Practical Nurse, revealed a misunderstanding that hospice care exempted residents from the 14-day limit for PRN psychotropic medications, leading to non-compliance with the facility's policy.
Medication Storage and Security Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain medications and medication carts in a secure and sanitary manner. During a medication administration observation, a staff member left a medication cart unlocked and unattended for approximately 7 minutes while speaking to another staff member. There were residents and staff members passing by the unlocked cart during this time. In another instance, a medication cart was found unattended and unlocked outside a resident's room. The staff member responsible for the cart acknowledged leaving it unlocked but was unsure how it happened. Additionally, an expired eye drop bottle was found in a medication cart, which had been removed from a resident's room but not disposed of properly. Loose pills were also found in the medication carts during reviews, which staff members acknowledged should not have been there. The facility's policies on medication storage and administration were not followed, leading to these deficiencies. The policies require medications to be stored properly and medication carts to be kept closed and locked when out of sight of the medication nurse. The facility's Director of Nursing was informed of these findings. The observations and interviews revealed lapses in maintaining the security and sanitation of medication carts, as well as the proper disposal of expired medications.
Failure to Follow Menu Nutritional Requirements
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to follow their menus to meet the nutritional needs of the residents. During an observation in the main kitchen, it was found that the corned beef served on a regular diet plate was only 1 ounce, instead of the 3 ounces specified in the facility's menu. The Food Service Manager instructed the cook to place two pieces of corned beef on each plate, which still did not meet the required 3 ounces. This discrepancy was confirmed through interviews and record reviews, affecting 40 residents on a regular diet out of a total census of 124 residents.
Failure to Provide Correct Food Choices and Preferences
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide food choices and preferences for three residents during dining observations. Resident #28, who had an intact cognitive status, reported that her meal trays often contained incorrect food items. During an observation, her breakfast tray was missing the hard-boiled eggs listed on the meal ticket, leaving her without a protein option. Resident #64, also cognitively intact, did not receive salad dressing with her green salad as indicated on her meal ticket, resulting in her not eating the salad. Resident #110, with an intact cognitive status, did not receive fortified pudding or a mighty shake as specified on her meal ticket during lunch observation. Interviews with the facility's Registered Dietitian and Food Service Manager revealed that while tray audits are periodically conducted to ensure meal ticket accuracy, the Registered Dietitian is not present daily. The Food Service Manager stated that there is a designated person at the end of the tray line responsible for ensuring the food items match the printed meal tickets. Despite these measures, discrepancies in meal delivery were observed, leading to the deficiencies noted in the report.
Failure to Adhere to Fluid Restriction for Dialysis Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide the correct fluid restriction for a resident with End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) who was dependent on dialysis. The physician's orders specified a fluid restriction of 720 milliliters (ml) per day, with no water to be left at the bedside. However, during an observation, the resident was found with a lunch tray containing 24 ounces of fluids instead of the prescribed 8 ounces. Additionally, later in the day, the resident was observed with 16 ounces of water at the bedside, contrary to the physician's orders and care plan. The resident, who had moderate cognitive impairment, was unaware of her fluid restriction. Interviews with staff revealed that Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) were responsible for providing water to residents and were supposed to check the electronic system for any fluid restrictions. The Registered Nurse stated that the nurse assigned to the resident would also inform the CNAs about any fluid restrictions. Despite this, the resident received more fluids than prescribed, indicating a failure in communication and adherence to the care plan. The CNA interviewed was aware of the fluid restriction but did not provide the extra water, suggesting a lapse in protocol by another staff member.
Food Service Safety Deficiencies
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. During an initial visit to the main kitchen, several concerns were observed, including open garbage cans in the food production area, debris and dirt on the floor around the food production area and behind the stove, and improperly labeled or dated food containers in the reach-in refrigerator. The internal temperatures of the reach-in refrigerator were also noted to be above the recommended 40 degrees Fahrenheit, with readings of 51 and 55 degrees Fahrenheit. Additionally, the walk-in refrigerator contained food items that were past their used-by dates, including ravioli and ground beef, and a plastic container labeled beef with a preparation and used-by date of the same day. The dry storage area had boxes of food items placed on the floor, which is against food safety standards. Furthermore, a dietary aide was observed working on the breakfast tray line and plating food items with bare hands. The aide then adjusted his glasses and continued plating food without washing his hands first. These observations were communicated to the Food Service Manager during an interview. The facility's failure to adhere to professional standards for food service safety was evident in the improper storage, labeling, and handling of food, as well as the lack of proper hygiene practices by staff.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 202 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 1 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Pompano Beach
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deerfield Beach Health And Rehabilitation Center | 0.2 mi | — | 1 | 0 |
| Aviata At The Sea - Pompano Beach | 3.2 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Childrens Comprehensive Care Center Inc | 3.3 mi | — | 2 | 0 |
| John Knox Village Of Pompano Beach | 3.7 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
| Solaris Healthcare Coconut Creek | 3.7 mi | — | 6 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Pompano Health And Rehabilitation Center.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 2026) and official state health department websites.