EVERGREEN WOODS
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Evergreen Woods in Spring Hill, Florida has a Trust Grade of D, indicating below-average care with some significant concerns. Ranking #494 out of 690 facilities in Florida puts it in the bottom half, and #5 out of 6 in Hernando County means only one local option is better. The facility is worsening, with issues increasing from 2 in 2024 to 13 in 2025, and it has 18 total deficiencies, including a critical incident where a resident was served a meal containing fish, leading to an allergic reaction that required hospitalization. Staffing is somewhat stable, with a 3/5 star rating and a turnover rate of 36%, better than the state average; however, the facility still faces average RN coverage and has incurred $24,850 in fines, which is concerning. Overall, while Evergreen Woods has some strengths, such as a decent staffing rating, the alarming number of deficiencies and critical incidents highlight significant areas for improvement.
- Trust Score
- D
- In Florida
- #494/690
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 36% turnover. Near Florida's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $24,850 in fines. Lower than most Florida facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ○ Average
- Each resident gets 32 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Florida. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 18 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 (36%)
12 points below Florida average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Below Florida average (3.2)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
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 18 deficiencies on record
Jul 2025
1 deficiency
1 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
Deficiency F0806
(Tag F0806)
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 ensure residents with allergies were provided foods that were free ...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2025
12 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0578
(Tag F0578)
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 ensure the residents' right to formulate advance directives for 2 o...
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** Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident assessments accurately reflected the residents' sta...
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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan for urinar...
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 resident environment was free of accident hazards in 1 of 2 units (Photographic evidence obtained).
Findings include:
...
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 ensure residents received appropriate urinary catheter care and services for 1 of 4 residents reviewed (Resident #421).
Findi...
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 accurate nurse staffing information was posted on a daily basis.
Findings include:
During an observation on 5/18/2025 at 9:30 AM, the ...
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 used appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) while providing high-contact care for 1 of 6 residents revi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received care and services in accordance with professional standards of practice for medication administrati...
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, record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received respiratory care as ordered by physician order for 3 of 5 residents reviewed for respiratory services (...
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
3) During an observation on 5/18/2025 at 9:53 AM in Resident #169's room, there were four 10-ml normal saline syringes at the resident's bedside.
During an interview on 5/18/2025 at 9:53 AM, Resident ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0838
(Tag F0838)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to evaluate residents' needs and acuity in the facility assessment to determine the number of qualified staff needed to meet each resident's n...
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records for 4 of 8 residents reviewed for medication management (Residents #51, #62, #...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
2 deficiencies
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 oxygen was administered consistent with profes...
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 sanitary manner in 1 of...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2022
3 deficiencies
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 the residents who needed respiratory care rece...
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 maintain an infection prevention and control program to prevent the possible development and transmission of communicable dis...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to post nurse staffing data on a daily basis.
Findings include:
During an observation upon entry to the facility on 9/25/22 at 9:20 AM, there wa...
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
- • 36% turnover. Below Florida's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 18 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $24,850 in fines. Higher than 94% of Florida facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- • Grade D (41/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Evergreen Woods's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns EVERGREEN WOODS 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 Evergreen Woods Staffed?
CMS rates EVERGREEN WOODS's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is 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 Evergreen Woods?
State health inspectors documented 18 deficiencies at EVERGREEN WOODS during 2022 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 16 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Evergreen Woods?
EVERGREEN WOODS is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility is operated by FLORIDA INSTITUTE FOR LONG-TERM CARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 120 certified beds and approximately 114 residents (about 95% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in SPRING HILL, Florida.
How Does Evergreen Woods Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, EVERGREEN WOODS's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (36%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Evergreen Woods?
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 Evergreen Woods Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, EVERGREEN WOODS has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). 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 Evergreen Woods Stick Around?
EVERGREEN WOODS 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 Evergreen Woods Ever Fined?
EVERGREEN WOODS has been fined $24,850 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Florida average of $33,327. 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 Evergreen Woods on Any Federal Watch List?
EVERGREEN WOODS 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.