LUXE AT LUTZ REHABILITATION CENTER (THE)
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Luxe at Lutz Rehabilitation Center has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns and poor overall quality. Ranking #526 out of 690 facilities in Florida places it in the bottom half, and #21 out of 28 in Hillsborough County suggests that only a few local options are better. Although the facility is improving, having reduced issues from 8 in 2024 to 5 in 2025, it still faces serious challenges, including a concerning staffing turnover rate of 79%, much higher than the state average. The facility has been fined $50,225, which is higher than 82% of Florida facilities, pointing to recurring compliance issues. Specific incidents include a resident experiencing respiratory distress due to inadequate oxygen therapy and staff failing to follow infection control procedures by not wearing proper protective equipment in isolation rooms, highlighting both critical weaknesses in care and management.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Florida
- #526/690
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 79% turnover. Very high, 31 points above average. Constant new faces learning your loved one's needs.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $50,225 in fines. Higher than 91% of Florida facilities. Major compliance failures.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 42 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Florida. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 25 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)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
33pts above Florida avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Above median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
31 points above Florida average of 48%
The Ugly 25 deficiencies on record
May 2025
5 deficiencies
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
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure continuous oxygen therapy was provided in consistent with p...
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
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 observation interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a post fall care plan was updated and interventi...
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
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 observations, interviews, and record review the facility did not ensure wound care orders were put in place and complet...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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 multiple residents
Based on observation, staff interview and policy and procedure review, the facility did not ensure resident medical records and confidential medical information were safeguarded in a confidential mann...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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 multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3-
An observation was conducted on 5/5/25 at 4:46 p.m. of Staff C, Activities Assistant, who entered room [ROOM NUMBER] with no ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2024
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the resident's right to privacy was upheld rel...
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
Notification of Changes
(Tag F0580)
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 the physician and resident representative was informed of me...
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** 4. Review of Resident #388's admission record showed Resident #388 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of unsp...
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
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 interview and record review, the facility failed to implement the Comprehensive Resident-Centered Care Plan related to ...
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. Observation and Interview on 4/15/2024 at 11:05 am resident #10 was observed in her bed dressed in a gown. The resident was o...
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** 2. During Observation and Interview on 4/15/2024 at 11:00 am, resident #389 was observed sitting in his wheelchair dressed for t...
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 interviews, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was less than 5.00%. Forty-four medication administration opportunities were observed and...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 4. Observation on 04/15/2024 at 12:53p Staff C, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) was observed entering residents' rooms passing...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2023
2 deficiencies
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
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
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 implement policies and procedures for ensuring the reporting of r...
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
Deficiency F0745
(Tag F0745)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to implement an effective discharge planning process by not ensuring m...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 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 F0559
(Tag F0559)
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 inform residents or their representatives of a room change for thre...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2022
7 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** During a facility tour on 02/02/22 at 01:18p.m., Resident #69 was observed laying on her bed with a dressing noted on her right ...
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 observations, record reviews, and interviews the facility failed to ensure weight variances were addressed for two (#4 ...
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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was less than 5.00%. Twenty-nine medication administration opportunities were observed, an...
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 maintain the kitchen in a safe and sanitary manner related to ensuring equipment is maintained in a clean manner and free from ...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, record reviews, interviews and review of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0885
(Tag F0885)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to notify residents, resident representatives, and staff members of ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Room Equipment
(Tag F0908)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observations, record review and interview the facility failed to maintain its kitchen equipment in a safe operating condition, related to a 6 burner stove.
Findings included:
Observations dur...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2020
2 deficiencies
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 observation, interview and record review, the facility did not ensure that the medication error rate was below 5.00%. 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 observations, staff interviews and record review, the facility did not ensure the kitchen and cooking equipment were maintained in a clean and sanitary manner related to the dishwashing machi...
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.
- • 25 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • $50,225 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Florida. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (25/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
- • 79% turnover. Very high, 31 points above average. Constant new faces learning your loved one's needs.
About This Facility
What is Luxe At Lutz Rehabilitation Center (The)'s CMS Rating?
CMS assigns LUXE AT LUTZ REHABILITATION CENTER (THE) 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 Luxe At Lutz Rehabilitation Center (The) Staffed?
CMS rates LUXE AT LUTZ REHABILITATION CENTER (THE)'s staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 79%, which is 33 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 82%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Luxe At Lutz Rehabilitation Center (The)?
State health inspectors documented 25 deficiencies at LUXE AT LUTZ REHABILITATION CENTER (THE) during 2020 to 2025. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm and 24 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Luxe At Lutz Rehabilitation Center (The)?
LUXE AT LUTZ REHABILITATION CENTER (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 120 certified beds and approximately 102 residents (about 85% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in LUTZ, Florida.
How Does Luxe At Lutz Rehabilitation Center (The) Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, LUXE AT LUTZ REHABILITATION CENTER (THE)'s overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (79%) 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 Luxe At Lutz Rehabilitation Center (The)?
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 Luxe At Lutz Rehabilitation Center (The) Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, LUXE AT LUTZ REHABILITATION CENTER (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 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 Luxe At Lutz Rehabilitation Center (The) Stick Around?
Staff turnover at LUXE AT LUTZ REHABILITATION CENTER (THE) is high. At 79%, the facility is 33 percentage points above the Florida average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 82%. 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 Luxe At Lutz Rehabilitation Center (The) Ever Fined?
LUXE AT LUTZ REHABILITATION CENTER (THE) has been fined $50,225 across 1 penalty action. This is above the Florida average of $33,581. 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 Luxe At Lutz Rehabilitation Center (The) on Any Federal Watch List?
LUXE AT LUTZ REHABILITATION CENTER (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.