MIAMI SHORES NURSING AND REHAB CENTER
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Miami Shores Nursing and Rehab Center has a Trust Grade of C, indicating it is average compared to other facilities, meaning it is in the middle of the pack but not particularly outstanding. It ranks #531 out of 690 in Florida, placing it in the bottom half of nursing homes statewide, and is #44 out of 54 in Miami-Dade County, suggesting only a few local options are better. The facility's trend is worsening, with reported issues increasing from 4 in 2023 to 13 in 2025. Staffing is a strength, earning a rating of 4 out of 5 stars, with a turnover rate of 34%, which is better than the state average, indicating that many staff members stay long-term and build relationships with residents. On the downside, there were specific concerns noted, such as a staff member failing to perform hand hygiene during hygiene care for a resident, which poses a risk of infection, and the improper storage of controlled substances in medication carts, which raises safety concerns.
- Trust Score
- C
- In Florida
- #531/690
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 34% turnover. Near Florida's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Florida facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 67 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Florida nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 23 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (34%)
14 points below Florida average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Below Florida average (3.2)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
12pts below Florida avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
The Ugly 23 deficiencies on record
Jun 2025
3 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
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to properly store controlled substances on three out of four sampled medication carts as evidenced by unreconciled medication...
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
QAPI Program
(Tag F0867)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, record review and interviews the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA)/QAPI) committee failed at demonstrating an effective plan of action to correct identified qual...
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** Based on observation record review and interviews, the facility failed to meet infection control standards of practice for Resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2025
10 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0583
(Tag F0583)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to provide privacy for residents' information on two out of four computer screens on the East side nursing station as evidence...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 observations, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Preadmission Screening and Resident Review...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive care plans for R...
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 observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide supervision to prevent safety hazards for on...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and services for catheter care for one (Resident #2) out of one resident who has a suprapubic ...
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
2) On 03/23/25 at 7:21 AM the surveyor was walking in the hallway, and an observation was made of the an unlocked medication cart (cart #1) on the [NAME] side nursing station. Staff U, Registered Nurs...
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 policy review, the facility failed to assure cardboard boxes were properly disposed and contained on the facility grounds. Cardboard boxes were scattered on the gr...
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, record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents' medical records are accurate in acc...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
QAPI Program
(Tag F0867)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to demonstrate effective plans of actions were implemented to correctly identify quality deficiencies in the problem area related to repeated ...
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) On 3/23/25 at 7:01 AM an observation was made of trash and food on the floor inside the East side nursing station resident's ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2023
4 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** room [ROOM NUMBER] - On 10/16/23 at 08:26 AM, the sink had cracked lines around the water stopper.
room [ROOM NUMBER] - On 10/17...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0604
(Tag F0604)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and records review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (Resident # 59) was free from the...
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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to have the daily nurse staffing schedule posted prior to the beginning of shifts on two out of two nurses' stations. This pract...
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 interview, the facility failed to implement infection control procedures for three (Resi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2022
6 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
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
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 failed to provide a safe, clean, homelike environment for 4 ou...
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** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assist during dining for 1 of 1 resident reviewed for...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Tube Feeding
(Tag F0693)
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 follow tube feeding orders for 2 out of 5 sampled re...
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 record reviews, observations and interviews, the facility failed to change the oxygen tubing weekly and document changi...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to monitor post-dialysis treatments. As evidenced by f...
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 record review, observations and interviews, the facility failed to secure medications for 1 out of 4 medication carts, and the facility failed to secure medications located in 1 of 2 nursing ...
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
- • 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.
- • 34% turnover. Below Florida's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 23 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
- • Grade C (50/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Miami Shores Nursing And Rehab Center's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns MIAMI SHORES NURSING AND REHAB CENTER 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 Miami Shores Nursing And Rehab Center Staffed?
CMS rates MIAMI SHORES NURSING AND REHAB CENTER's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 34%, compared to the Florida average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Miami Shores Nursing And Rehab Center?
State health inspectors documented 23 deficiencies at MIAMI SHORES NURSING AND REHAB CENTER during 2022 to 2025. These included: 23 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Miami Shores Nursing And Rehab Center?
MIAMI SHORES NURSING AND REHAB CENTER 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 99 certified beds and approximately 90 residents (about 91% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in MIAMI, Florida.
How Does Miami Shores Nursing And Rehab Center Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, MIAMI SHORES NURSING AND REHAB CENTER's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (34%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Miami Shores Nursing And Rehab Center?
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 Miami Shores Nursing And Rehab Center Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, MIAMI SHORES NURSING AND REHAB CENTER 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 Miami Shores Nursing And Rehab Center Stick Around?
MIAMI SHORES NURSING AND REHAB CENTER has a staff turnover rate of 34%, 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 Miami Shores Nursing And Rehab Center Ever Fined?
MIAMI SHORES NURSING AND REHAB CENTER 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 Miami Shores Nursing And Rehab Center on Any Federal Watch List?
MIAMI SHORES NURSING AND REHAB CENTER 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.