Deficiency Index

Blue Palms Health and Rehabilitation Center of del

Deland, Florida · CCN 105937

13 surveys since 2011. The first finding at harm level was recorded in 2017.

Data as of , released by CMS on October 8, 2026. Source: CMS Provider Data Catalog.

Citations on record
54
Surveys
13
Harm or worse
3
Immediate jeopardy
0
The record, 2011–2025
’11’15’20’25
No harm recordedHarm or worseNot surveyed
Harm or worse3

Findings where a surveyor recorded actual harm to a resident.

Beyond CMS’s monthly file10/13

Older surveys no longer in CMS’s monthly file or on Care Compare. They are shown here.

The facility

Certified beds
60
Ownership
For profit - Limited Liability company
Chain
Independent
County
Volusia
Medicare-certified since
1997

CMS ratings

Overall
5
Health inspection
4
Staffing
3
Quality measures
5

CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.

Compared with similar facilities

Not shown for this facility: too few citations in window (n=9, floor 20).

Last survey on record

Apr 2, 2025

586 days ago.

Counts surveys with at least one finding. A clean survey leaves no record here, so the real gap may be shorter.

Staffing

MeasureThis facilityPeer median
Nurse hours per resident day3.723.73
Registered-nurse hours per resident day0.71—
Annual nurse turnover56.8%45.7%

As reported by the facility to CMS, beside the peer-group median.

Enforcement

No fines, payment denials or special-focus designation on the current CMS record.

Severity of recent findings

Citations by CMS scope and severity. Rows are harm level, columns are how widespread the finding was.
SeverityIsolatedPatternWidespread
Immediate jeopardyJ—K—L—
Actual harmG—H—I—
No harm, potential for more than minimalD777.8%E111.1%F111.1%
No harm, potential for minimalA—B—C—
CMS’s current file: 9 of the 54 citations on record.

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at Blue Palms Health and Rehabilitation Center of del, in the surveyor’s own words.

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF812Jun 22, 2023

    Based on kitchen food service observations, staff interviews, facility document review, and facility policy and procedure review, the facility failed to follow proper sanitation and food handling practices to prevent the outbreak of foodborne illness, with the potential to affect all residents who consumed foods from the facility, by failing to complete temperature logs for the dish machine and ice cream box, properly clean and sanitize the kitchen ice machine, fryer, upper and lower-level of convection oven, can opener, oven tray lines, and grill; date mark numerous open food packages in the dry storage room, on the bread rack, under the food prep table, in the refrigerator, and in the freezer. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, patternF880Apr 2, 2025

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to establish an infection prevention and control program (IPCP) that included a system for preventing, identifying, reporting, investigating, and controlling infections, specifically, the spread of a gastrointestinal infection (GI) affecting 15 (Residents #208, #32, #42, #36, #22, #207, #21, #24, #35, #51, #40, #1, #8, #14 and #20) of 50 residents living in the facility. Failure to control the spread of infection can result in serious harm to residents, staff, volunteers, visitors, and other individuals providing services to the facility. Facility staff also failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) for two (Residents #1 and #304) of two residents with indwelling devices from a total survey sample of 30 residents. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF645Apr 2, 2025

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a Level II Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) evaluation was completed after a Level 1 screening suggested the possibility of a serious mental illness for one (Resident #6) of one resident reviewed for PASRR, out of 30 residents in the total survey sample. The findings include: A review of Resident #6's medical record revealed an initial admitted [DATE] with the most recent readmission on 4/25/2024. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF656Apr 2, 2025

    Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to develop comprehensive care plans that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet residents' medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs for four (Residents #1, #40, #24 and #31) of 30 residents reviewed for care planning from a total survey sample of 30 residents. The findings include: 1. On 3/30/25 at 11:30 AM, Resident #1 was observed in bed with a pressure relieving mattress, catheter bag hanging at bedside, bilateral boots to prevent pressure wounds, and a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) line in the left upper arm. A review of the medical record revealed that Resident #1 was initially admitted on [DATE]. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, isolatedF684Apr 2, 2025

    Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for two (Residents #304 and #305) of 30 residents in the total survey sample. Resident #304 was not provided adequate care for a Jackson Pratt (JP) drain, and the facility failed to obtain a timely hospice consult per physician's orders for Resident #305, who was admitted on [DATE], with a physician's order for Consult [provider name] Hospice dated 3/12/25 at 12:55 PM. As of 4/2/25, three weeks after the order was written and on the last day of the survey, there was no documented evidence that a hospice consult had been obtained. The findings include: 1. […]

Read 20 findings in full →The most serious and the most recent: 20 of 54 on record.

Every survey on record

FindingsAt actual harm or above

  • Apr 2, 2025Standard4 findings
  • Jun 22, 2023Standard2 findings
  • Sep 23, 2021Standard3 findings
  • Apr 29, 2019Complaint2 findings
  • Jul 13, 2017Standard12 findings · 3 harm
  • Feb 8, 2017Complaint2 findings
  • Aug 11, 2016Standard7 findings
  • Apr 11, 2016Complaint1 finding
Show the 5 earlier surveys
  • May 14, 2015Standard4 findings
  • Jun 12, 2014Standard3 findings
  • May 16, 2013—2 findings
  • Feb 16, 2012—8 findings
  • Jan 13, 2011—4 findings

Surveys that found no deficiencies are not in CMS’s files and do not appear here.

Comparable facilities

The nearest facilities to this one in the same peer group, by weighted findings.

Deficiency Index is independent and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or approved by CMS, Medicare, or any government agency. About this data · Report a correction