VIVO HEALTHCARE CLEWISTON
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Vivo Healthcare Clewiston has a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns with care quality, which places it in the bottom tier of Florida nursing homes. It ranks #582 out of 690 facilities statewide, meaning it is in the lower half, and is ranked #2 of 2 in Hendry County, suggesting that only one other local option is available. However, the facility is showing signs of improvement, with the number of issues reported decreasing from 7 in 2024 to 2 in 2025. Staffing is relatively strong, with a 4 out of 5 rating and a turnover rate of 26%, which is better than the state average, but the RN coverage is concerning, being lower than 87% of Florida facilities. There are serious concerns regarding resident safety, including a recent incident where a resident fell off the bed due to inadequate assistance, leading to significant injuries, and another case where the facility failed to protect a resident from known aggressive behaviors from others. While there are notable strengths in staffing, the facility's high fines of $40,691 and multiple serious incidents indicate that families should weigh these issues carefully when considering care for their loved ones.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Florida
- #582/690
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ✓ Good
- 26% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 22 points below Florida's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $40,691 in fines. Lower than most Florida facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 25 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Florida. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 17 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Low Staff Turnover (26%) · Staff stability means consistent care
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover is low (26%)
22 points below Florida average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, staff retention, fire safety.
The Bad
Below Florida average (3.2)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
Above median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 17 deficiencies on record
Apr 2025
2 deficiencies
2 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interviews the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from neglect for 1 (R...
Read full inspector narrative →
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the safety interventions were documented in the care plan a...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2024
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Assessments
(Tag F0636)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive assessment accurately reflec...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
MDS Data Transmission
(Tag F0640)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure completion and transmission of completed resident Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) data to the Center for Medicare and Medicai...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, review of facility policy and procedures, record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to maintain urinary catheters in a safe and sanitary manner for 1(Resident #303)...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0700
(Tag F0700)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Review of the clinical record for Resident #24 revealed an admission date of 2/21/24. Diagnoses included chronic kidney disea...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0638
(Tag F0638)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure completion of the quarterly minimum data set (MDS) within 92 days from the assessment reference date of the last completed ass...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, review of the clinical record, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide the neces...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0679
(Tag F0679)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, facility policy review, resident and staff interview, the facility failed to provide an ong...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
1 deficiency
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, review of the facility's abuse and neglect policy and procedure, resident and staff interviews, the faci...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2022
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on clinical record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan w...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. The facility policy Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Supporting (revised 3/18) documented, Residents will be provided with c...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0679
(Tag F0679)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
2. Review of Resident #12's clinical record showed an admission date of 12/4/13. Diagnoses included Alzheimer's, generalized anxiety disorder and dementia.
Review of the minimum data set (a tool used ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0680
(Tag F0680)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on administrative and staff interview the facility failed to ensure the activity program was directed by a qualified activities professional who is eligible for certification as a therapeutic re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0688
(Tag F0688)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, review of the clinical record, review of facility policy and procedures, staff, and resident interviews the facility failed to provide appropriate services and interventions for ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, review of facility policy, clinical record review, staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to have documentation of coordination to ensure effective interventions to a...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2020
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0700
(Tag F0700)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure 3 (Resident #98, #262 and #360) of 4 residents reviewed for accident hazards were assessed for the need for bed rails,...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What safeguards are in place to prevent abuse and neglect?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • 26% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 22 points below Florida's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: Federal abuse finding, 3 harm violation(s), $40,691 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 17 deficiencies on record, including 3 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • $40,691 in fines. Higher than 94% of Florida facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- • Grade F (23/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Vivo Healthcare Clewiston's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns VIVO HEALTHCARE CLEWISTON an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered below average nationally. Within Florida, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.
How is Vivo Healthcare Clewiston Staffed?
CMS rates VIVO HEALTHCARE CLEWISTON's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 26%, compared to the Florida average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Vivo Healthcare Clewiston?
State health inspectors documented 17 deficiencies at VIVO HEALTHCARE CLEWISTON during 2020 to 2025. These included: 3 that caused actual resident harm and 14 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Vivo Healthcare Clewiston?
VIVO HEALTHCARE CLEWISTON is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by ALLEGIANT HEALTHCARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 155 certified beds and approximately 108 residents (about 70% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in CLEWISTON, Florida.
How Does Vivo Healthcare Clewiston Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, VIVO HEALTHCARE CLEWISTON's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (26%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Vivo Healthcare Clewiston?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What safeguards and monitoring systems are in place to protect residents from abuse or neglect?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?" These questions are particularly relevant given the substantiated abuse finding on record.
Is Vivo Healthcare Clewiston Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, VIVO HEALTHCARE CLEWISTON has documented safety concerns. The facility has 1 substantiated abuse finding (meaning confirmed case of resident harm by staff or other residents). The facility has a 2-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Florida. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Vivo Healthcare Clewiston Stick Around?
Staff at VIVO HEALTHCARE CLEWISTON tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 26%, the facility is 20 percentage points below the Florida average of 46%. Low turnover is a positive sign. It means caregivers have time to learn each resident's needs, medications, and personal preferences. Consistent staff also notice subtle changes in a resident's condition more quickly. Registered Nurse turnover is also low at 29%, meaning experienced RNs are available to handle complex medical needs.
Was Vivo Healthcare Clewiston Ever Fined?
VIVO HEALTHCARE CLEWISTON has been fined $40,691 across 2 penalty actions. The Florida average is $33,486. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Vivo Healthcare Clewiston on Any Federal Watch List?
VIVO HEALTHCARE CLEWISTON is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.