OCALA OAKS REHABILITATION CENTER
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Ocala Oaks Rehabilitation Center has a Trust Grade of C+, indicating it is slightly above average in quality but not exceptional. It ranks #397 out of 690 facilities in Florida, placing it in the bottom half, and #7 out of 11 in Marion County, meaning only a few local options are better. The facility is improving, with the number of issues decreasing from 8 in 2024 to 7 in 2025. Staffing is rated average with a turnover rate of 42%, which is on par with the state average, but there is concerning RN coverage, being below 86% of Florida facilities. However, there are some weaknesses to consider. The facility has been fined $9,750, which is an average amount, but it still raises concerns about compliance. Specific incidents noted by inspectors include failures to provide timely Medicare notifications for residents and not following physician orders for medications, which could potentially harm residents' health. Overall, while there are strengths in its improvement trend and average staffing, families should weigh these issues carefully when considering Ocala Oaks for their loved ones.
- Trust Score
- C+
- In Florida
- #397/690
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 42% turnover. Near Florida's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ○ Average
- $9,750 in fines. Higher than 59% of Florida facilities. Some compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 24 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Florida. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 19 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
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 19 deficiencies on record
Aug 2025
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0582
(Tag F0582)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received the Notice of Medicare Non-Coverage (NOMNC) (Form CMS-10123) within the required two day time frame for 2 of 3 re...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to report an allegation of misappropriation of residents' property, medications. Findings include:During an interview on 08/12/2025 at 8:30 AM ...
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 physician's orders were followed as prescribed for 1 of 2 residents, Resident #9 sampled for wound care, and failed to...
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, record reviews, staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure oxygen was administered per the physician...
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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure kitchen equipment was maintained in a safe and clean operating manner and failed to ensure the cleaning schedule wa...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0865
(Tag F0865)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to implement a performance improvement plan related to an identified concern by failing to monitor the effectiveness of the plan when it was id...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0925
(Tag F0925)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an effective pest control program.Findings include:During a tour of the kitchen on 08/13/25 at 6:45 AM with the Admi...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2024
8 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
MDS Data Transmission
(Tag F0640)
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 transmit resident assessment data within 14 days after completion o...
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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received appropriate restorative ser...
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 residents received respiratory care services a...
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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure the posted nurse staffing data included the required information.
Findings include:
During an observation while conducting the initial...
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
4. During an observation on 5/13/2024 at 12:23 PM, Resident #314 had his urinal, with drops of urine, on his meal table (Photographic evidence obtained).
During an observation on 5/13/2024 at 12:44 PM...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0582
(Tag F0582)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received the Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage (SNF ABN) within the required time frame ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Drug Regimen Review
(Tag F0756)
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 that physician orders following the pharmacist...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of Resident #46's Medication Administration Record for May 2024 showed staff documented blood sugar of 100 and code 11...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2023
4 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** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received care and services for centr...
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 performed hand hygiene during medication administration and followed the accepted infection control practice sta...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the drugs and biologicals used in the facility...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
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 maintain accurate and complete medical records for 3 ...
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.
- • 42% turnover. Below Florida's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 19 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Ocala Oaks Rehabilitation Center's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns OCALA OAKS REHABILITATION CENTER 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 Ocala Oaks Rehabilitation Center Staffed?
CMS rates OCALA OAKS REHABILITATION CENTER'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 59%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Ocala Oaks Rehabilitation Center?
State health inspectors documented 19 deficiencies at OCALA OAKS REHABILITATION CENTER during 2023 to 2025. These included: 19 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Ocala Oaks Rehabilitation Center?
OCALA OAKS 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 SOVEREIGN HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 120 certified beds and approximately 105 residents (about 88% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in OCALA, Florida.
How Does Ocala Oaks Rehabilitation Center Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, OCALA OAKS REHABILITATION CENTER'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 Ocala Oaks Rehabilitation 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 Ocala Oaks Rehabilitation Center Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, OCALA OAKS REHABILITATION 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 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 Ocala Oaks Rehabilitation Center Stick Around?
OCALA OAKS REHABILITATION CENTER 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 Ocala Oaks Rehabilitation Center Ever Fined?
OCALA OAKS REHABILITATION CENTER has been fined $9,750 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Florida average of $33,176. 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 Ocala Oaks Rehabilitation Center on Any Federal Watch List?
OCALA OAKS 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.