HARBOUR HEALTH CENTER
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Harbour Health Center has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the quality of care provided. It ranks #504 out of 690 facilities in Florida, placing it in the bottom half, and #6 out of 8 in Charlotte County, meaning only two local options are worse. The facility is showing signs of improvement, as the number of reported issues decreased from 6 in 2024 to 4 in 2025. Staffing is a relative strength with a rating of 4 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 28%, which is well below the state average. However, there have been serious deficiencies, including failure to protect a resident from physical abuse and neglect regarding incontinence care for two residents, which raises concerns about oversight and the quality of resident care.
- Trust Score
- F
- In Florida
- #504/690
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ✓ Good
- 28% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 20 points below Florida's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $6,682 in fines. Lower than most Florida facilities. Relatively clean record.
- 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
- 13 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
-
Low Staff Turnover (28%) · Staff stability means consistent care
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover is low (28%)
20 points below Florida average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, staff retention, fire safety.
The Bad
Below Florida average (3.2)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 13 deficiencies on record
Jul 2025
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
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, review of facility policy and procedures, resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from physical abuse for 1 (Resident #899...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 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
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
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 protect the resident(s') right to be free from neglect when it fai...
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
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, as a result of a facility's investigation, when an alleged violation was verified, the facility failed to take appropriate corrective action to protect residents ...
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
Incontinence Care
(Tag F0690)
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 incontinence care was provided to 2 residents (#1 and #2). ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
6 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, record review, staff, resident and family interview, the facility failed to ensure 2 (Residents #12, #29) ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0685
(Tag F0685)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure 1 (Resident #29) of 1 dependent residen...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observations, resident and staff interviews, clinical records review and facility policy review the facility failed to ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, and staff interview the facility failed to ensure its medication error rate remained below 5%. Four licensed nurses with 27 opportunities were observed. Two medica...
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
On 2/06/24 10:08 a.m. the medication storage room C wing checked with the Assistant Director of Nursing (ADON). During the observation a large white oval pill was found in the sink. Internet search sh...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure they posted and updated the nurse staffing information with the facility name and an updated census per shift. The facility further fa...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2022
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Drug Regimen Review
(Tag F0756)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a monthly Medication Regimen Review (MRR) for 2 (#24 and #61) of 5 residents reviewed.
The findings included:
The facility Policy...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review and staff interview the facility failed to administer medications according to the physician's orders for 1 (Resident #283) of 5 residents observed for medication a...
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, record review, review of facility policy, staff and resident interviews, the facility failed to ensure proper storage of medications for 1 (Resident #7) of 1 resident observed wi...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What safeguards are in place to prevent abuse and neglect?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • 28% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 20 points below Florida's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: Federal abuse finding, 1 harm violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 13 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • Grade F (36/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Harbour's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns HARBOUR HEALTH 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 Harbour Staffed?
CMS rates HARBOUR HEALTH CENTER's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 28%, compared to the Florida average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Harbour?
State health inspectors documented 13 deficiencies at HARBOUR HEALTH CENTER during 2022 to 2025. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm and 12 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Harbour?
HARBOUR HEALTH 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 HEALTHPEAK PROPERTIES, INC., a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 104 certified beds and approximately 87 residents (about 84% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in PORT CHARLOTTE, Florida.
How Does Harbour Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, HARBOUR HEALTH CENTER's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (28%) 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 Harbour?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What safeguards and monitoring systems are in place to protect residents from abuse or neglect?" "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 substantiated abuse finding on record.
Is Harbour Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, HARBOUR HEALTH CENTER has documented safety concerns. The facility has 1 substantiated abuse finding (meaning confirmed case of resident harm by staff or other residents). The facility has a 2-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 Harbour Stick Around?
Staff at HARBOUR HEALTH CENTER tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 28%, the facility is 18 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 Harbour Ever Fined?
HARBOUR HEALTH CENTER has been fined $6,682 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Florida average of $33,146. 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 Harbour on Any Federal Watch List?
HARBOUR HEALTH 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.