ROYAL PALM BEACH HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Royal Palm Beach Health and Rehabilitation Center has received a Trust Grade of C, which means it is average and sits in the middle of the pack among nursing homes. It ranks #413 out of 690 facilities in Florida, placing it in the bottom half, and #33 out of 54 in Palm Beach County, indicating only a few local options are better. The facility's trend is worsening, as the number of reported issues increased from 7 in 2024 to 9 in 2025. Staffing is a notable strength with a rating of 4 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 36%, which is below the Florida average of 42%. However, there are some concerns, including $4,156 in fines, which is average, and several specific incidents, such as staff not using proper protective equipment during catheter care and residents expressing dissatisfaction with the quality of food, indicating areas that need improvement.
- Trust Score
- C
- In Florida
- #413/690
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 36% turnover. Near Florida's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $4,156 in fines. Lower than most Florida facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 44 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Florida. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 28 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
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (36%)
12 points below Florida average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, 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 28 deficiencies on record
May 2025
9 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Review of the facility's policy, Unnecessary Drugs - Without Adequate Indication for Use, with a reference date of 11/2020 an...
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 record review and interview, the facility failed to obtain wound culture results in a timely manner for 1 of 28 sampled...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to obtain a urology consult in a timely manner and faile...
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 reviews, the facility failed to obtain a physician's order for CPAP (Continuous Pos...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0700
(Tag F0700)
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 residents did not use full side rails who wer...
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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure behavior monitoring for 3 of 5 sampled residen...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0810
(Tag F0810)
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 provide adaptive equipment for each drink offered to...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0919
(Tag F0919)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, interview and observations, the facility failed to ensure each toilet was adequately equipped to allow r...
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** 3. Record review revealed Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. A comprehensive assessment dated [DATE] documented...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
7 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** 2. Review of the record revealed Resident #95 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of a progress noted dated 12/13/23 ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
PASARR Coordination
(Tag F0644)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to initiate a level II PASARR assessment for 1 of 5 sampled residents reviewed for psychotropic medications, Resident #2.
The findings include...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
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 a specialty air mattress, provide appropriate...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to obtain a urology consult for a resident with frequent...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Menu Adequacy
(Tag F0803)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. During an interview conducted on 02/07/24 at 12:44 PM, Resident # 78 showed the surveyor his lunch plate and reported that he...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0917
(Tag F0917)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interviews, observations and record reviews, the facility failed to provide individual closet space for 1 of 1 sampled ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
3. During a resident interview conducted on 02/05/24 at 10:01 AM regarding the quality of the food, Resident #78 stated, The chicken is as hard as a rock. Resident #78 stated that his friend often bro...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2022
12 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
Based on interview, record review and policy review, the facility failed to report an alleged resident to resident act of aggression for 1 of 1 sampled resident reviewed for abuse (Resident #22).
The...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
PASARR Coordination
(Tag F0644)
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 initiate a Level I PASRR and refer appropriately for a Level II PAS...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0655
(Tag F0655)
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 complete a baseline care plan for 2 of 30 sampled residents reviewe...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
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 conduct care plan conferences for 2 of 30 sampled residents reviewe...
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** 4. Facility Policy, titled, Radiology and other Diagnostic Services and Reporting, dated 11/2020 documented, The facility must p...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0700
(Tag F0700)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, record review and policy review, the facility failed to ensure documentation of informed consen...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0744
(Tag F0744)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 3. Facility Policy, titled, Behavior Monitoring, dated 11/2020, documented, Behaviors shall be documented clearly and concisely ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Menu Adequacy
(Tag F0803)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
2. Record review for Resident #10 documented an admission date of 06/08/22 with diagnoses that included Lung Disease, Diabetes, Heart Disease and Dementia. A Minimum Data Set Resident Assessment on 09...
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 record review and interview, the facility failed to maintain accurate resident records for 2 of 6 sampled residents, Re...
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 observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain a pest free environment for 2 of 2 sampled residents, Residents #6 and #57.
The findings included
On 09/19/22 at 9:15 AM, Resident #...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** On 09/19/22 at 1:50 PM, a wheelchair with two broken armrests, (one armrest wrapped with a dirty ACE wrap to keep the padding on...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0885
(Tag F0885)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify residents' representatives and family members of new positive Covid-19 cases in a timely manner.
The findings included:
Review of t...
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.
- • $4,156 in fines. Lower than most Florida facilities. Relatively clean record.
- • 36% turnover. Below Florida's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 28 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
- • Grade C (58/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Royal Palm Beach Center's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns ROYAL PALM BEACH 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 Royal Palm Beach Center Staffed?
CMS rates ROYAL PALM BEACH HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 36%, compared to the Florida average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Royal Palm Beach Center?
State health inspectors documented 28 deficiencies at ROYAL PALM BEACH HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER during 2022 to 2025. These included: 27 with potential for harm and 1 minor or isolated issues.
Who Owns and Operates Royal Palm Beach Center?
ROYAL PALM BEACH HEALTH 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 SIMCHA HYMAN & NAFTALI ZANZIPER, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 120 certified beds and approximately 97 residents (about 81% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in ROYAL PALM BEACH, Florida.
How Does Royal Palm Beach Center Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, ROYAL PALM BEACH HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (36%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Royal Palm Beach 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 Royal Palm Beach Center Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, ROYAL PALM BEACH HEALTH AND 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 Royal Palm Beach Center Stick Around?
ROYAL PALM BEACH HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER has a staff turnover rate of 36%, 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 Royal Palm Beach Center Ever Fined?
ROYAL PALM BEACH HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER has been fined $4,156 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Florida average of $33,120. 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 Royal Palm Beach Center on Any Federal Watch List?
ROYAL PALM BEACH 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.