REGENCY FLORENCE
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Regency Florence has a Trust Grade of D, indicating below-average performance with some concerns about care quality. It ranks #66 out of 127 facilities in Oregon, placing it in the bottom half, and #5 of 13 in Lane County, meaning only four local options are worse. The facility is improving, having reduced its issues from 12 in 2024 to just 1 in 2025. Staffing is a relative strength with a 4/5 star rating, although turnover is at 55%, which is average for the state. However, there are some significant weaknesses, including a serious incident where a resident fell during a transfer, resulting in fractures, and multiple missed medication doses, which could lead to adverse health consequences. Overall, while there are areas of improvement, families should weigh these concerns carefully when considering this facility.
- Trust Score
- D
- In Oregon
- #66/127
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 55% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $7,443 in fines. Lower than most Oregon facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ○ Average
- Each resident gets 35 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Oregon. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 38 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Oregon average (3.0)
Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities
Near Oregon avg (46%)
Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
7 points above Oregon average of 48%
The Ugly 38 deficiencies on record
Mar 2025
1 deficiency
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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow physician orders for therapy, failed to provide incontinence care and failed to ensure a call light was accessible ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2024
11 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0552
(Tag F0552)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to obtain consent prior to administration of a vaccine for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#1) reviewed for immunizations. This pla...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0578
(Tag F0578)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to obtain information related to advance directives and health care decisions for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#30) reviewed for...
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 interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to thoroughly investigate allegations of abuse for 1 of 7 sampled residents (#94) reviewed for abuse. This placed residents a...
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 interview and record review the facility failed to follow doctor's orders for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#24) reviewed f...
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
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to address orders for corrective lenses for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#1) reviewed for vision. This placed residents at risk ...
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
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to assess and monitor pressure ulcers for 2 of 2 sampled residents (#s 11 and 94) reviewed for pressure ulcers....
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to monitor residents at risk for elopement and follow care plans related to safety for 2 of 6 sampled residents (#s 8 and 93)...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0699
(Tag F0699)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure provision of trauma-informed care for 2 of 2 sampled residents (#s 11 and 30) reviewed for behavioral needs. This p...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** 2. Resident 24 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including heart disease.
A pharmacist review completed 9/2024 i...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Laboratory Services
(Tag F0770)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to process physician laboratory orders timely for 2 of 5 sampled residents (#s 1 and 20) reviewed for unnecessary medications...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Dental Services
(Tag F0791)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to make a dental appointment for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#1) reviewed for dental needs. This placed residents at risk for u...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2024
1 deficiency
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
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to provide incontinence care for 3 of 3 dependent residents (#s 101, 102 and 103) reviewed for incontinence care...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 2023
1 deficiency
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 interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to complete a thorough investigation within five working days related to potential narcotic medication misappropriation for 1...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2023
8 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
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to administer medication for prevention of blood clots as ordered by the physician which resulted in a significant medication...
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
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure controlled drugs listed in Scheduled II-V of the Controlled Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act and...
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
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure medical records for each resident were complete and accurately documented for 1 of 1 facility reviewed for medical ...
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
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure Staff 2 (DNS), Staff 3 (RNCM), Staff 9 (LPN...
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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure medications were available per physician orders for 6 of 6 sampled residents (#s 2, 3, 4, 9, 13 and 14) reviewed fo...
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
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure weekly skin and wound assessments were completed and completed timely and appropriate wound care trea...
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
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure policies and procedures were in place for the safe and secure handling of controlled medications and ...
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
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation and interview it was determined the facility failed to store milk-based nutritional supplements correctly for 2 of 2 medication carts observed for medications. This placed residen...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2023
5 deficiencies
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure staff provided a safe mechanical lift transfer during care for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#11) reviewed for accident...
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
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from verbal abuse by Staff 19 (Former RN) for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#242) revi...
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
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to report allegations of abuse and serious bodily injury to the State Survey Agency for 1 of 3 sampled residents (#11) review...
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 interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to thoroughly investigate an injury of unknown origin for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#21) reviewed for abuse. This placed resi...
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 interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to follow physician orders for bowel care for 1 of 5 sampled residents (#8) reviewed for medications. This placed residents a...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2023
5 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
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from verbal, physical and mental abuse by staff for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#1) r...
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
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure an allegation of misappropriation of personal property by staff was reported in a timely manner for 1 of 1 sampled ...
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
Deficiency F0602
(Tag F0602)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to protect residents' rights to be free from misappropriation of personal property by staff for 13 of 14 sampled residents (#...
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
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure professional standards were followed by nur...
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
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to establish a system to accurately reconcile controlled medications using acceptable standards of practice and have safeguar...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2022
6 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
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to notify the physician of severe weight loss for 2 of 2 sampled residents (#s 20 and 26) reviewed for nutrition. This placed...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to complete a comprehensive care plan related to weight loss for 1 of 2 sampled residents (#26) reviewed for nutrition. This ...
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 interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to maintain adequate nutrition parameters for 2 of 2 ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to staff a registered nurse for 8 consecutive hours per day 7 days per week for 4 out of 42 days reviewed for staffing. This ...
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 and interview it was found the facility failed to dispose of personal protective equipment (PPE) safely for...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0886
(Tag F0886)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure COVID-19 testing was completed for 1 of 3 halls (long term hall) reviewed for COVID-19 testing. This placed residen...
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
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • 38 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • Grade D (48/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
- • 55% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
About This Facility
What is Regency Florence's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns REGENCY FLORENCE an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Oregon, 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 Regency Florence Staffed?
CMS rates REGENCY FLORENCE's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 55%, which is 9 percentage points above the Oregon average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs.
What Have Inspectors Found at Regency Florence?
State health inspectors documented 38 deficiencies at REGENCY FLORENCE during 2022 to 2025. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm and 37 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Regency Florence?
REGENCY FLORENCE 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 REGENCY PACIFIC MANAGEMENT, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 72 certified beds and approximately 41 residents (about 57% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in FLORENCE, Oregon.
How Does Regency Florence Compare to Other Oregon Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Oregon, REGENCY FLORENCE's overall rating (3 stars) matches the state average, staff turnover (55%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Regency Florence?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "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 high staff turnover rate.
Is Regency Florence Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, REGENCY FLORENCE 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 #1 of 100 nursing homes in Oregon. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Regency Florence Stick Around?
Staff turnover at REGENCY FLORENCE is high. At 55%, the facility is 9 percentage points above the Oregon average of 46%. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?
Was Regency Florence Ever Fined?
REGENCY FLORENCE has been fined $7,443 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Oregon average of $33,153. 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 Regency Florence on Any Federal Watch List?
REGENCY FLORENCE 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.