CLARIDGE HOUSE NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Claridge House Nursing and Rehabilitation Center has received a Trust Grade of F, which indicates significant concerns about the quality of care provided. They rank #623 out of 690 facilities in Florida, placing them in the bottom half, and #49 out of 54 in Miami-Dade County, meaning there are only a few options worse than them locally. While the facility is showing signs of improvement with a decrease in reported issues from 9 in 2024 to 8 in 2025, it still has a significant number of deficiencies, totaling 33, with 2 categorized as critical. Staffing is rated average with an 18% turnover, which is better than the state average, and while RN coverage is also average, it is crucial to note that there have been serious incidents, such as a resident leaving the facility undetected and being found 5.2 miles away after several hours, highlighting serious supervision issues. Additionally, there was a concern regarding food safety practices that could potentially affect many residents. Overall, families should weigh these strengths and weaknesses carefully when considering this facility.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Florida
- #623/690
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ✓ Good
- 18% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 30 points below Florida's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $24,850 in fines. Lower than most Florida facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ○ Average
- Each resident gets 36 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Florida. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 33 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Low Staff Turnover (18%) · Staff stability means consistent care
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover is low (18%)
30 points below Florida average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, staff retention, fire safety.
The Bad
Below Florida average (3.2)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 33 deficiencies on record
Apr 2025
2 deficiencies
2 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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, records reviewed and interviews, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to ensure residents'...
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 observations, record review and interviews, the facility's administration failed to ensure effective systems were in pl...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2025
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
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 observations, reviews and interviews, the facility's staff failed to notify Resident #3's family /representative and ph...
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
Tube Feeding
(Tag F0693)
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 implement measures to prevent aspiration for one (Re...
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 F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, records reviewed and interviews, the facility failed to secure medications and ensure the resident (Resid...
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, interviews and record reviewed during this survey's investigations it has been determined that the facility failed to demonstrate effective plan of actions were implemented to c...
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
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations records reviewed and interviews the facility's staff failed to implement infection prevention control precautions as evidenced by staff failed to follow Enhanced Barrier Precauti...
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
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations records reviewed and interviews, the facility's staff failed to address respiratory emergencies in a timel...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2024
8 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0561
(Tag F0561)
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 accommodate a resident's choice for food preferences f...
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, record review and interview facility failed to implement the plan of care for one resident (Resident #75) out of five sampled as evidenced by no communication form filled out by ...
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 observation, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure the facility's protocols and policies and proced...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interviews, and record review facility failed to store and label medications properly in three medication...
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 observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to demonstrate effective plan of actions were implemented to correct identified quality deficiencies in the problem area related...
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
On 8/21/24 at 8:33 AM an observation revealed the first floor North nursing station Biohazard room door was open (photo evidence).
On 8/21/24 at 9:17 AM Staff F, Floor tech entered The Biohazard room ...
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 observations, record review and interview the facility failed to ensure food was prepared under sanitary conditions as evidenced by failure to maintain equipment in the kitchen in a clean san...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Room Equipment
(Tag F0908)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a convection oven and stove used to prepare food for residents were in good repair and clean. This has the potential to...
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
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure medical records were complete and accurate with all informa...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 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
Grievances
(Tag F0585)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to acknowledge concerns voiced by one (Resident #1) out of one residents investigated for loss of personal items.
The findings included:
Duri...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2023
12 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** 2. During the initial tour of resident screenings conducted on 04/17/2023 at 8:50 AM, the following were observed:
2 South:
roo...
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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Preadmission Screening and Resident Revi...
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, Record Review and Interview, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive care plan for falls for one ...
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, record review and interview, the facility failed to provide a safe environment free of accident hazards fo...
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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to change the oxygen tubing weekly as required for thr...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure pharmaceutical procedures were followed durin...
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 proper temperatures of the foods stored in the 1 North Unit Floor Pantry Refrigerator. The refrigerator did not contain...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0848
(Tag F0848)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the arbitration agreements presented to three residents (Resident number 165, Resident number 120 and Resident number 210) out of th...
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 observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to demonstrate an effective plans of action were implemented to correct identified quality deficiencies in the problem area rela...
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 F0925
(Tag F0925)
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, it was determined that the facility failed to maintain an effective pest co...
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
Deficiency F0602
(Tag F0602)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to prevent misappropriation of funds for six out of six residents (Re...
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
Abuse Prevention Policies
(Tag F0607)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to implement policies and procedure on abuse, neglect, exploitation, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2022
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to implement their policy and procedures on abuse by n...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, records reviewed and interviews, the facility failed to ensure narcotics/controlled substances were reconciled for 1 out of 4 medication carts (2 North Front Cart) observed in t...
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 observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure medications/pharmaceuticals are stored and accounted for to meet professional standards for each resident on 2 out o...
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
- • 18% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 30 points below Florida's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 33 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $24,850 in fines. Higher than 94% of Florida facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- • Grade F (19/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Claridge House's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns CLARIDGE HOUSE NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much 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 Claridge House Staffed?
CMS rates CLARIDGE HOUSE NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 18%, compared to the Florida average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Claridge House?
State health inspectors documented 33 deficiencies at CLARIDGE HOUSE NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER during 2022 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 31 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 Claridge House?
CLARIDGE HOUSE NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER 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 VENTURA SERVICES FLORIDA, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 240 certified beds and approximately 213 residents (about 89% occupancy), it is a large facility located in NORTH MIAMI, Florida.
How Does Claridge House Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, CLARIDGE HOUSE NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (18%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (1 stars) is much below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Claridge House?
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 Claridge House Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, CLARIDGE HOUSE NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 1-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 Claridge House Stick Around?
Staff at CLARIDGE HOUSE NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 18%, the facility is 28 percentage points below the Florida average of 46%. Low turnover is a positive sign. It means caregivers have time to learn each resident's needs, medications, and personal preferences. Consistent staff also notice subtle changes in a resident's condition more quickly.
Was Claridge House Ever Fined?
CLARIDGE HOUSE NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER has been fined $24,850 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Florida average of $33,327. 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 Claridge House on Any Federal Watch List?
CLARIDGE HOUSE NURSING AND REHABILITATION 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.