GROVE HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION CENTER AND REH
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Grove Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns and poor overall performance. Ranked #499 out of 690 facilities in Florida, they are in the bottom half of nursing homes in the state, and #8 out of 9 in Citrus County, meaning only one local facility is performing worse. The trend is worsening, with issues increasing from 9 in 2024 to 13 in 2025. Staffing is average with a rating of 3 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 47%, which is comparable to the state average. However, the facility has alarming fines totaling $258,390, which is higher than 96% of Florida facilities, indicating repeated compliance problems. There are serious weaknesses in care, including critical incidents where staff failed to appropriately manage a resident's dangerously low blood sugar levels, ignoring physician orders and not notifying medical professionals when the resident's condition worsened. Another critical finding showed the facility did not effectively implement policies to address changes in residents' conditions. Despite some strengths, such as excellent quality measures, the overall picture is concerning, and families should carefully consider these factors when researching this facility for their loved ones.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Florida
- #499/690
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 47% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $258,390 in fines. Higher than 84% of Florida facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- 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
- 30 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-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
Near Florida avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
Well above median ($33,413)
Significant penalties indicating serious issues
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 30 deficiencies on record
Jun 2025
9 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
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 ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments were accurate for 2 of 9 ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
PASARR Coordination
(Tag F0644)
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 coordinate assessments for the residents with newly evident or poss...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to revise the comprehensive care plan after a significant change for 1 of 6 residents reviewed (Resident #96). Findings include: During an int...
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 ensure residents received health care services consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 1 resident with ce...
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 ensure residents received appropriate respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice for 2 of 6 resident...
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 that it was free of medication error of five percent or greater. The error rate was 5.88%.Findings include: During an ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0806
(Tag F0806)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to accommodate resident food preferences for vegetarian residents for 1 of 9 residents reviewed for nutrition (Resident #11). Fi...
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, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medical records were complete and accurate for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for medication management (Resident #108).Fin...
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 used appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) while providing care to the residents who were on transmiss...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2025
4 deficiencies
3 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care according to profess...
Read full inspector narrative →
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Administration
(Tag F0835)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility administration failed to administer the facility in a manner that enables i...
Read full inspector narrative →
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
QAPI Program
(Tag F0867)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to utilize the Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement (QAPI)...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure resident medical records were complete and accurate for 1 ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 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 ensure staff used appropriate PPE (Personal Protectiv...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2024
8 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
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 ensure assessments accurately reflected the residents' status for 1...
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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure care plan was implemented for placement of bilateral fall mats for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for implementation of car...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
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 residents' environments were free of accidents...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food was properly labeled and dated or discarded in 2 of 3 nourishment rooms (Hall 500/600 and Hall 400).
Findings inc...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Garbage Disposal
(Tag F0814)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure garbage and refuse was properly contained in dumpsters.
Findings include:
During an observation on 3/25/2024 at 9:24 A...
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
3. Review of Resident #2's laboratory results for a urinalysis with reflex to urine culture read, blood 3+ [can be significant for proteinuria], and leukocyte esterase 3+ [may indicate a urinary tract...
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
2. During an observation on 3/26/2024 at 8:30 AM, Staff A, LPN, did not perform hand hygiene, prepared medications, and administered them to Resident #81. Staff A administered Resident #81's insulin v...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
2. During an observation on 3/25/2024 at 11:30 AM, Resident #98 had a medicine cup on her bedside table with a small dime size round orange tablet in the cup (Photographic evidence obtained).
During a...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2022
8 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to ensure dignity was provided and resident rights were protected for 2 of 4 residents, Residents #23 and #50, sampled for indwe...
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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure fall precaution interventions as outlined in the care plan were implemented for 1 of 2 residents, Resident #52, sample...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of the admission record for Resident #311 documented the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the foll...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents maintained acceptable parameters of ...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure professional standards of practice were follow...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the handrails in one residential hallway, Hall 300, of six residential hallways were maintained in good repair.
Findings include:
An...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
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 care and services in accordance with professio...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper infection control standards were maintained for hand hygiene during medication administration for 4 of 5 observ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "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.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 3 life-threatening violation(s), $258,390 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 30 deficiencies on record, including 3 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $258,390 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Florida. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Grove Healthcare And Rehabilitation Center And Reh's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns GROVE HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION CENTER AND REH 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 Grove Healthcare And Rehabilitation Center And Reh Staffed?
CMS rates GROVE HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION CENTER AND REH's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 47%, compared to the Florida average of 46%.
What Have Inspectors Found at Grove Healthcare And Rehabilitation Center And Reh?
State health inspectors documented 30 deficiencies at GROVE HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION CENTER AND REH during 2022 to 2025. These included: 3 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 27 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Grove Healthcare And Rehabilitation Center And Reh?
GROVE HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION CENTER AND REH 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 GOLD FL TRUST II, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 120 certified beds and approximately 115 residents (about 96% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in HERNANDO, Florida.
How Does Grove Healthcare And Rehabilitation Center And Reh Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, GROVE HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION CENTER AND REH's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (47%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Grove Healthcare And Rehabilitation Center And Reh?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "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 Immediate Jeopardy citations.
Is Grove Healthcare And Rehabilitation Center And Reh Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, GROVE HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION CENTER AND REH has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 3 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). 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 Grove Healthcare And Rehabilitation Center And Reh Stick Around?
GROVE HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION CENTER AND REH has a staff turnover rate of 47%, which is about average for Florida nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Grove Healthcare And Rehabilitation Center And Reh Ever Fined?
GROVE HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION CENTER AND REH has been fined $258,390 across 1 penalty action. This is 7.2x the Florida average of $35,663. Fines at this level are uncommon and typically indicate a pattern of serious deficiencies, repeated violations, or failure to correct problems promptly. CMS reserves penalties of this magnitude for facilities that pose significant, documented risk to resident health or safety. Families should request specific documentation of what issues led to these fines and what systemic changes have been implemented.
Is Grove Healthcare And Rehabilitation Center And Reh on Any Federal Watch List?
GROVE HEALTHCARE AND REHABILITATION CENTER AND REH 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.