ATHENS POST ACUTE LLC
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Athens Post Acute LLC has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. Ranking #597 out of 690 in Florida and #28 out of 29 in Volusia County places it in the bottom half of facilities, suggesting limited local options for better care. While the facility is showing some signs of improvement, with issues decreasing from 9 in 2022 to 8 in 2023, a high staff turnover rate of 64% is concerning, especially when combined with $61,744 in fines, which is higher than 90% of other Florida facilities. Staffing is rated 3 out of 5 stars, but RN coverage is below average, meaning residents may not receive the full attention they need from registered nurses. Specific incidents include the failure to designate a full-time Director of Nursing and unsafe food storage practices that could affect resident health, highlighting both strengths and weaknesses in the facility's operations.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Florida
- #597/690
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 64% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $61,744 in fines. Lower than most Florida facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ○ Average
- Each resident gets 34 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Florida. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 22 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in fire safety.
The Bad
Below Florida average (3.2)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
18pts above Florida avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Above median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
16 points above Florida average of 48%
The Ugly 22 deficiencies on record
Nov 2023
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0576
(Tag F0576)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews, record review, observations, review of the resident council minutes and the Resident Handbook, the facility failed to ensure packages and mail were unopened when received for 1 of...
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
Based on observations, staff and resident interviews, medical record review, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to provide activities of daily living services to ma...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0698
(Tag F0698)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on medical record review, observations, staff and resident interviews, and a review of the facility's dialysis policy, the facility failed to ensure shared communication between the facility and...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations of medication administration, interviews with staff, and review of the Policies and Procedures for Infecti...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0565
(Tag F0565)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, staff and resident interviews, and facility policy review, it was determined that the facility failed to provide the resident group with a private space for 8 out of 12 resident...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on staff interviews and facility job description review, it was determined that the facility failed to designate a registered nurse to serve as the director of nursing (DON) on a full time basis...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observations, staff interviews, facility document review, and facility policy and procedure review, the facility failed to properly store food with the potential to affect all residents who c...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2023
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0575
(Tag F0575)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to post, in a form and manner accessible and understandable to residents, resident representatives a list of names, addresses (mailing and ema...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2022
9 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0679
(Tag F0679)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide an ongoing program to support residents in th...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, record review and facility policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure it provided an accurately documented Psychosocial Participation Record for two (R...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review and interviews, the facility failed to follow standard precautions to prevent the spread of ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews and document review, the facility failed to 1) ensure that it provided one (Resident #26) out ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** On 1/26/2022 at 9:14 AM, during an observation of room [ROOM NUMBER], the privacy curtain was badly stained, sink was badly warp...
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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one (Resident #36) out of 30 sampled residents...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0801
(Tag F0801)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview and record review, the Director of Dining Services (DDS), who was not a qualified dietitian was not full-time at the facility and the facility's consultant dietitian st...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food safety. The facility failed to do...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Garbage Disposal
(Tag F0814)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure that garbage and refuse was disposed of properly. The condition of the outside facility garbage dumpster, which was used for the entir...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2020
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0582
(Tag F0582)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure proper notice was provided to one (Resident #16) of on...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice by not performing wound care and dressing ch...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were not expired and opened medicat...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Laboratory Services
(Tag F0770)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to obtain laboratory services for two (Residents #2 and #9) of seven r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records in accordance with professional standards for one (Resident #44) of one resi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • 22 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
- • $61,744 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Florida. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (25/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
- • 64% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
About This Facility
What is Athens Post Acute Llc's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns ATHENS POST ACUTE LLC an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much 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 Athens Post Acute Llc Staffed?
CMS rates ATHENS POST ACUTE LLC's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 64%, which is 18 percentage points above the Florida average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 75%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Athens Post Acute Llc?
State health inspectors documented 22 deficiencies at ATHENS POST ACUTE LLC during 2020 to 2023. These included: 22 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Athens Post Acute Llc?
ATHENS POST ACUTE LLC 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 ELEVATION HEALTHCARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 60 certified beds and approximately 52 residents (about 87% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in DELAND, Florida.
How Does Athens Post Acute Llc Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, ATHENS POST ACUTE LLC's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (64%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Athens Post Acute Llc?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "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 facility's high staff turnover rate.
Is Athens Post Acute Llc Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, ATHENS POST ACUTE LLC has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 1-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Florida. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Athens Post Acute Llc Stick Around?
Staff turnover at ATHENS POST ACUTE LLC is high. At 64%, the facility is 18 percentage points above the Florida average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 75%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?
Was Athens Post Acute Llc Ever Fined?
ATHENS POST ACUTE LLC has been fined $61,744 across 10 penalty actions. This is above the Florida average of $33,696. Fines in this range indicate compliance issues significant enough for CMS to impose meaningful financial consequences. Common causes include delayed correction of deficiencies, repeat violations, or care failures affecting resident safety. Families should ask facility leadership what changes have been made since these penalties.
Is Athens Post Acute Llc on Any Federal Watch List?
ATHENS POST ACUTE LLC 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.