PALM GARDEN OF GAINESVILLE
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Palm Garden of Gainesville has a Trust Grade of D, which means it is below average and has some concerning issues. It ranks #543 out of 690 facilities in Florida, placing it in the bottom half, and #7 out of 9 in Alachua County, indicating there are only two better options nearby. The facility is improving slightly, with issues decreasing from 11 in 2024 to 10 in 2025. Staffing is an average concern, rated 3 out of 5 stars, but has a high turnover rate of 64%, which is above the state average of 42%. There have been no fines reported, which is a positive sign, but the facility has less RN coverage than 88% of Florida facilities, meaning residents may not receive the oversight they need. Specific incidents noted include a failure to store food safely, increasing the risk of contamination, and staff not following proper precautions for a resident with a contagious condition. Additionally, there were issues with incomplete medical records for several residents, which could affect their care. While there are strengths such as no fines and a good rating for quality measures, the overall concerns about safety and staffing could be worrying for families considering this nursing home for their loved ones.
- Trust Score
- D
- In Florida
- #543/690
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 64% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Florida facilities.
- 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
- 29 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Below Florida average (3.2)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
18pts above Florida avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
16 points above Florida average of 48%
The Ugly 29 deficiencies on record
May 2025
9 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0628
(Tag F0628)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure a recapitulation summary was documented for 1 of 3 residents, Resident #136, reviewed for discharge.
Findings include:
Review of re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure accurate Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments for 3 of 8 residents, Residents #73, #103, and #87, reviewed for MDS asses...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to comply with the development and implementation of a comprehensive care plan regarding suctioning in 1 out of 3 residents. Resident #73.
Fi...
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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain appropriate grooming a...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure treatment and care was provided in accordance ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Drug Regimen Review
(Tag F0756)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
2) Review of Resident #62 Omnicare Consultation Report dated 4/18/2025 read, Recommendation: Please attempt a gradual dose reduction to Abilify 1 mg once daily. The consultation report did not have a ...
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principle for...
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain appropriate infection prevention and control practices during medication administration for 2 of 15 residents, Resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
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 maintain complete and accurately documented medical re...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2025
1 deficiency
MINOR
(C)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident records were complete and accurate for 1 of 3 residents, Resident #2, reviewed for wound care.
Findings include:
Review of...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2024
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
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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to prevent the possible spread of infection when failing...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2024
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
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide a clean and homelike environment.
Findings include:
During an observation on 11/7/2024 beginning at 10:30 AM, there were multiple cir...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2024
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 F0582
(Tag F0582)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide Medicare coverage and liability notice to resident representative for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for notice of Medicare non coverage...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
8 deficiencies
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 interview, the facility failed to ensure that resident assessments were transmitted in a timely manner for 2 of 3 residents sampled, Residents #44 and #46.
Findings include:...
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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide surgical wound care and treatment in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 of 4 residents reviewed...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to administer oxygen per physician order and according to professional standards of practice for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure nurse staffing information was posted daily.
Findings include:
During an observation on 2/26/2024 at 8:56 AM, the posted nurse staffin...
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medications were securely stored in 1 of 3 residential units, Unit 300.
Findings include:
1. During an observation on...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain accurate and complete medical records for 1 ...
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff performed hand hygiene during medication administration to help prevent the possible transmission of infection a...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was safely stored, covered, labeled, and failed to ensure the equipment was cleaned in the areas of the kitchen a...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 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
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure medical records for each resident were complete and accurately documented for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for skin and wound care (Resi...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 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
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that resident records were complete and accurate for 1 (Resi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 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
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide necessary treatment to promote healing and prevent infection of existing pressure ulcers for 2 of 4 sampled residents...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2022
5 deficiencies
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure the residents received urostomy site dressing ...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure a resident with limited range of motion receiv...
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was not 5% or greater. The medication error rate was 28.57%.
Findings include:
1. During a ...
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 ensure food was safely stored in the kitchen and dry storage areas, and the food was distributed in accordance with professio...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
6. Review of Resident #3's physician order dated 10/4/2022 reads, Vancomycin HCl Capsule 125 mg, give 1 capsule by mouth one time a day every 3 day(s) for C. diff until 10/31/2022.
During an interview...
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
- • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Florida facilities.
- • 29 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
- • Grade D (45/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
- • 64% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
About This Facility
What is Palm Garden Of Gainesville's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns PALM GARDEN OF GAINESVILLE 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 Palm Garden Of Gainesville Staffed?
CMS rates PALM GARDEN OF GAINESVILLE'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.
What Have Inspectors Found at Palm Garden Of Gainesville?
State health inspectors documented 29 deficiencies at PALM GARDEN OF GAINESVILLE during 2022 to 2025. These included: 28 with potential for harm and 1 minor or isolated issues.
Who Owns and Operates Palm Garden Of Gainesville?
PALM GARDEN OF GAINESVILLE 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 PALM GARDEN HEALTH AND REHABILITATION, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 150 certified beds and approximately 137 residents (about 91% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in GAINESVILLE, Florida.
How Does Palm Garden Of Gainesville Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, PALM GARDEN OF GAINESVILLE's overall rating (2 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 Palm Garden Of Gainesville?
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 Palm Garden Of Gainesville Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, PALM GARDEN OF GAINESVILLE 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 2-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 Palm Garden Of Gainesville Stick Around?
Staff turnover at PALM GARDEN OF GAINESVILLE is high. At 64%, the facility is 18 percentage points above the Florida average of 46%. 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 Palm Garden Of Gainesville Ever Fined?
PALM GARDEN OF GAINESVILLE has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Palm Garden Of Gainesville on Any Federal Watch List?
PALM GARDEN OF GAINESVILLE 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.