SOLARIS HEALTHCARE WATERMAN
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Solaris Healthcare Waterman has a Trust Grade of B+, which means it is recommended and above average compared to other nursing homes. It ranks #113 out of 690 facilities in Florida, placing it in the top half, and #2 out of 17 in Lake County, indicating only one local option is better. The facility is improving, with issues decreasing from 7 in 2024 to 3 in 2025. Staffing is rated average with a 3/5 star rating, but the turnover rate is concerning at 53%, higher than the state average of 42%. Notably, there have been zero fines, which is a positive sign. However, there have been incidents where proper infection control measures were not followed during IV medication administration and food safety was not adequately maintained in the kitchen, highlighting areas that need attention. Overall, while the facility has strengths such as excellent RN coverage and no fines, families should be aware of the staffing turnover and specific health and safety issues.
- Trust Score
- B+
- In Florida
- #113/690
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 53% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Florida facilities.
- 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
- 16 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
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 16 deficiencies on record
Aug 2025
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0561
(Tag F0561)
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' preference for shower date and time...
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide respiratory services consistent with professional standards of practice for 3 of 4 residents reviewed for oxygen ther...
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 policy and procedure review, the facility failed to prevent the possible spread of infection and communicable diseases when failing to place a resident on contact ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 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 Resident #115's Discharge MDS dated [DATE] under Section A, Subsection A2105 showed the resident was discharged to ...
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 residents received medication as per physician order for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for blood pressure medication, Resident #106.
Fin...
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were not served known allergen food items for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for nutrition, Resident #419.
Findin...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Tube Feeding
(Tag F0693)
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 received the appropriate enteral fee...
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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure foods and beverages were stored in a safe and sanitary manner in 1 of 4 nourishment rooms.
Findings include:
During a...
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident records were complete and accurate for 1 of 2 residents sampled for oxygen therapy, Resident #417.
Findings i...
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
2. During an observation on 4/22/2024 at 9:40 AM, Resident #418 was sitting in a recliner in his room, receiving IV (intravenous) medication via PICC (Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter) line loca...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2022
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** 2. Review of the admission record for Resident #73 documented the resident was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis including but n...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review , the facility failed to ensure that drugs and biologicals used in the facili...
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 accurate and complete medical records for 1 of 2 residents...
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, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure foods and beverages were stored in a safe and sanitary manner in the main kitchen and in 8 of 8 nourishment areas.
Fin...
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 during intravenous (IV) medication administration and by not performing hand hygiene...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Deficiency F0847
(Tag F0847)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure the arbitration agreements presented to 3 residents, Resident #126, Resident #127 and Resident #226, of 3 residents reviewed explicit...
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
- • Grade B+ (85/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Florida.
- • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Florida facilities.
- • 16 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Solaris Healthcare Waterman's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns SOLARIS HEALTHCARE WATERMAN an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much 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 Solaris Healthcare Waterman Staffed?
CMS rates SOLARIS HEALTHCARE WATERMAN's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 53%, compared to the Florida average of 46%.
What Have Inspectors Found at Solaris Healthcare Waterman?
State health inspectors documented 16 deficiencies at SOLARIS HEALTHCARE WATERMAN during 2022 to 2025. These included: 15 with potential for harm and 1 minor or isolated issues.
Who Owns and Operates Solaris Healthcare Waterman?
SOLARIS HEALTHCARE WATERMAN 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 SOLARIS HEALTHCARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 120 certified beds and approximately 113 residents (about 94% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in TAVARES, Florida.
How Does Solaris Healthcare Waterman Compare to Other Florida Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Florida, SOLARIS HEALTHCARE WATERMAN's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (53%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Solaris Healthcare Waterman?
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 Solaris Healthcare Waterman Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, SOLARIS HEALTHCARE WATERMAN 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 5-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 Solaris Healthcare Waterman Stick Around?
SOLARIS HEALTHCARE WATERMAN has a staff turnover rate of 53%, which is 7 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 Solaris Healthcare Waterman Ever Fined?
SOLARIS HEALTHCARE WATERMAN has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Solaris Healthcare Waterman on Any Federal Watch List?
SOLARIS HEALTHCARE WATERMAN 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.