PALM GARDEN OF OCALA
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Palm Garden of Ocala has a Trust Grade of C+, indicating it is decent and slightly above average among nursing homes. It ranks #250 out of 690 facilities in Florida, placing it in the top half of the state, and #5 out of 11 in Marion County, meaning only four local options are better. The facility is improving, having reduced issues from seven in 2024 to six in 2025, but it still faces challenges, including $8,512 in fines, which is average for the state. Staffing is average with a 3/5 rating, and the turnover rate is at 52%, which is higher than the state average. However, the nursing home has less RN coverage than 97% of Florida facilities, which may impact the quality of care provided. Specific incidents reported by inspectors include a resident with Huntington's disease who fell and suffered injuries, indicating possible gaps in care planning and supervision. Additionally, there were findings where the facility failed to implement proper care plans for residents at risk for falls and those needing respiratory care, suggesting a need for improvements in care coordination. While the facility has strengths, such as good quality measures, families should weigh these concerns when considering Palm Garden of Ocala for their loved ones.
- Trust Score
- C+
- In Florida
- #250/690
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 52% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $8,512 in fines. Lower than most Florida facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 19 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Florida. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 18 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Florida avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 18 deficiencies on record
Jun 2025
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
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 ensure Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments accurately reflected the ...
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of accident hazards for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for dining (Resident #70).
Findings include:
Dur...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
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 ensure residents' medication regimens were free from unnecessary an...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure foods were stored in a safe and sanitary manne...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive care plan for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for accidents (Resident #70), 2 of 5 residents ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received respiratory care as ordered by physician for 4 of 8 residents reviewed for respiratory services (Re...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
A resident was harmed · 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 adequate supervision during toileting to prevent an accident ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2024
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure medications were administered according to professional standards of practice and quality for 4 of 5 observations for m...
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 ensure residents who are unable to carry out activiti...
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 record review and interview the facility failed to ensure medications were managed in accordance with professional standards for 1 of 5 residents, Resident #111, reviewed for medications.
Fi...
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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide appropriate treatment and services to prevent possible urinary tract infections for 1 of 3 residents, Resident #67 rev...
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 and interview, the facility failed to ensure the kitchen environment was kept clean and sanitary in accordance with professional standards. (Photographic evidence obtained).
Findi...
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to prevent the possible spread of infection for residents on contact isolation, during hydration pass, and medication administrat...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2022
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Assessment Accuracy
(Tag F0641)
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 ensure the assessment accurately reflected the resident's status 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needed respiratory care re...
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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles. ...
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, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure medical records were accurately documented in a...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Comprehensive Assessments
(Tag F0636)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure minimum data set assessments were completed and transmitted in a timely manner for 38 residents (Resident #2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 8, 10, 1...
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
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • 18 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
About This Facility
What is Palm Garden Of Ocala's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns PALM GARDEN OF OCALA an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within Florida, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Palm Garden Of Ocala Staffed?
CMS rates PALM GARDEN OF OCALA's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 52%, compared to the Florida average of 46%.
What Have Inspectors Found at Palm Garden Of Ocala?
State health inspectors documented 18 deficiencies at PALM GARDEN OF OCALA during 2022 to 2025. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm, 16 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Palm Garden Of Ocala?
PALM GARDEN OF OCALA 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 PALM GARDEN HEALTH AND REHABILITATION, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 180 certified beds and approximately 171 residents (about 95% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in OCALA, Florida.
How Does Palm Garden Of Ocala Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, PALM GARDEN OF OCALA's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (52%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Palm Garden Of Ocala?
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 Palm Garden Of Ocala Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, PALM GARDEN OF OCALA 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 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 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 Palm Garden Of Ocala Stick Around?
PALM GARDEN OF OCALA has a staff turnover rate of 52%, which is 6 percentage points above the Florida average of 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 Palm Garden Of Ocala Ever Fined?
PALM GARDEN OF OCALA 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 Palm Garden Of Ocala on Any Federal Watch List?
PALM GARDEN OF OCALA 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.