TERRACE AT BISHOP'S GLEN, THE
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Terrace at Bishop's Glen in Holly Hill, Florida has a Trust Grade of C+, indicating it is slightly above average but not exceptional. Ranked #429 out of 690 in Florida, it falls in the bottom half of facilities statewide, and at #23 out of 29 in Volusia County, only one local option is better. The facility is improving, with the number of issues decreasing from 6 in 2024 to just 2 in 2025. Staffing levels are average, with a turnover rate of 42%, which is on par with the state average, and the facility has an average RN coverage. However, there are concerns, including a serious medication error that led to a resident's hospitalization and sanitation issues in food handling that could expose residents to foodborne illnesses. Overall, while there are some strengths in staffing stability, families should weigh these alongside the facility's weaknesses in care and compliance.
- Trust Score
- C+
- In Florida
- #429/690
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 42% turnover. Near Florida's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $8,512 in fines. Lower than most Florida facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 47 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Florida. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 11 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
-
Staff turnover below average (42%)
6 points below Florida average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Florida average (3.2)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
Near Florida avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
The Ugly 11 deficiencies on record
Jun 2025
2 deficiencies
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 that one (Resident #20) of seven residents rece...
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 kitchen food service observations, staff interviews, facility document review, and facility policy and procedure review, the facility failed to follow proper sanitation and food handling prac...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2024
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
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, medical record review, facility documents review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2024
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0645
(Tag F0645)
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 that a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PAS...
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** Based on record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure that one (Resident #9) of three residents with pressur...
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 observations, a staff interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that one (Resident #39) of four resid...
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 observations, record reviews, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5%, based on 37 opportunities for error with three errors identified, re...
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 kitchen food service observations, staff interviews, facility document review, and facility policy and procedure review, the facility failed to follow proper sanitation and food handling prac...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2022
3 deficiencies
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** Based on record reviews, observations and interviews, the facility failed to provide services to maintain personal hygiene (groo...
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 observations, interviews, record review, and facility policy and procedure review, the facility failed to ensure that a...
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 observation, interview, record review, and facility assessment tool review, the facility failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) worked at least 8 consecutive hours a day, seven days a week ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • 42% turnover. Below Florida's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 11 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
About This Facility
What is Terrace At Bishop'S Glen, The's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns TERRACE AT BISHOP'S GLEN, THE an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Florida, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.
How is Terrace At Bishop'S Glen, The Staffed?
CMS rates TERRACE AT BISHOP'S GLEN, THE's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 42%, compared to the Florida average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care. RN turnover specifically is 56%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Terrace At Bishop'S Glen, The?
State health inspectors documented 11 deficiencies at TERRACE AT BISHOP'S GLEN, THE during 2022 to 2025. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm and 10 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Terrace At Bishop'S Glen, The?
TERRACE AT BISHOP'S GLEN, THE is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 60 certified beds and approximately 48 residents (about 80% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in HOLLY HILL, Florida.
How Does Terrace At Bishop'S Glen, The Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, TERRACE AT BISHOP'S GLEN, THE's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (42%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Terrace At Bishop'S Glen, The?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?"
Is Terrace At Bishop'S Glen, The Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, TERRACE AT BISHOP'S GLEN, THE 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 3-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 Terrace At Bishop'S Glen, The Stick Around?
TERRACE AT BISHOP'S GLEN, THE has a staff turnover rate of 42%, 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 Terrace At Bishop'S Glen, The Ever Fined?
TERRACE AT BISHOP'S GLEN, THE has been fined $8,512 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Florida average of $33,164. 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 Terrace At Bishop'S Glen, The on Any Federal Watch List?
TERRACE AT BISHOP'S GLEN, THE 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.