DELANEY PARK HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Delaney Park Health and Rehabilitation Center has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the facility's quality of care. Despite ranking #16 out of 37 nursing homes in Orange County, which is in the top half, the facility's overall position is troubling due to a worsening trend in issues, increasing from 7 to 12 in one year. Staffing is a relative strength with a turnover rate of 34%, lower than the state average, and the facility has good RN coverage, exceeding 90% of Florida facilities. However, the $57,818 in fines is concerning, as it is higher than 86% of nursing homes in the state, suggesting ongoing compliance issues. Notably, there have been critical incidents, including failures to protect a resident from neglect related to suicidal tendencies, highlighting serious concerns about the facility's ability to ensure resident safety and well-being.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Florida
- #341/690
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 34% turnover. Near Florida's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ○ Average
- $57,818 in fines. Higher than 64% of Florida facilities. Some compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 60 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
-
5-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 quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Florida average (3.2)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
12pts below Florida avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Above median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
The Ugly 23 deficiencies on record
Jul 2025
10 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to notify the physician of a change in resident condition...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0605
(Tag F0605)
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 one of five residents reviewed for unnecessary...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0627
(Tag F0627)
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 document/investigate residents who discharged Against Medical Advi...
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** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident at risk for Deep Vein Thrombosi...
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 provide care and services in accordance with professi...
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 interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records that were accurately documented in accord...
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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility's Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to identify an area of systemic non-compliance with the Infecti...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0584)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, and interview, the facility failed to maintain a homelike environment in 30 resident rooms on one of two floors, (100 wing) by failing to maintain ceiling vent covers with a clea...
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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure infection control policies and procedures were...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0882
(Tag F0882)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview, and record review, facility failed to ensure the facility had an Infection Preventionist responsible for the facility's Infection Prevention and Control Program (IPCP) with qualifi...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2025
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
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow the physician's order for oxygen (O2) for 1 of 8 residents reviewed for O2 use, of a total sample of 12 residents, (#2...
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
Room Equipment
(Tag F0908)
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 oxygen concentrators were maintained in safe, ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2024
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0554
(Tag F0554)
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 conduct a medication self-administration assessment t...
Read full inspector narrative →
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 interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment for 1 of 2 r...
Read full inspector narrative →
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** 2. Review of resident #36's medical record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including rheumato...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0694
(Tag F0694)
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 provide intravenous (IV) care and services according ...
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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement Transmission Based precautions to prevent t...
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 had a pattern of failing to follow physician prescribed respiratory therapy orders for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for respiratory care, o...
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 and interview, the facility failed to store food in the freezer and walk-in refrigerator in accordance with food safety standards to prevent foodborne illness.
Findings:
On 6/02/...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2023
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Menu Adequacy
(Tag F0803)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to follow the menu for pureed foods and pureed portion sizes.
Findings:
Review of the facility's menu revealed the lunch meal fo...
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, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure food packages were re-sealed to prevent contamination and ensure supplements were discarded timely to prevent foodborn...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
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
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from neglect by not obtainin...
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
Deficiency F0740
(Tag F0740)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to prevent a vulnerable, cognitively, and mentally impaired resident, ...
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
- • 34% turnover. Below Florida's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s), $57,818 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 23 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $57,818 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in Florida. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (26/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Delaney Park Center's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns DELANEY PARK HEALTH AND 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 Delaney Park Center Staffed?
CMS rates DELANEY PARK HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is 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 Delaney Park Center?
State health inspectors documented 23 deficiencies at DELANEY PARK HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER during 2023 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 21 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 Delaney Park Center?
DELANEY PARK HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 89 certified beds and approximately 83 residents (about 93% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in ORLANDO, Florida.
How Does Delaney Park Center Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, DELANEY PARK HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER's overall rating (3 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 Delaney Park Center?
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 Delaney Park Center Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, DELANEY PARK HEALTH 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 3-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 Delaney Park Center Stick Around?
DELANEY PARK HEALTH AND REHABILITATION 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 Delaney Park Center Ever Fined?
DELANEY PARK HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER has been fined $57,818 across 1 penalty action. This is above the Florida average of $33,657. 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 Delaney Park Center on Any Federal Watch List?
DELANEY PARK HEALTH 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.