Woodlands Healthcare Center

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

60.0% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 225 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 52.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 100 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.55 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 85% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 25% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 65 beds and averages 61.5 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.14 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.84 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.451 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.69 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.33 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.87 to 0.75 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 46% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

26 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 16 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · D2025-09-19 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — isolated
  Prevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure free from unnecessary psychotropic medication (medications capable of affecting the minds, emotions, and behaviors) for one of three sampled resident (Resident 1) when: 1.There was no documented evidence of non-pharmacological (treatments and strategies that mange health conditions without using medications) approaches attempted before administered psychotropic medication lorazepam (used to treat for anxiety [persistent worry and fear about everyday situations]) to Resident 1;2.There was no documented evidence of side effects monitored for use of lorazepam (an unintended consequence of a medication, may be harmful) for Resident 1;3. There was no documented evidence of episodes of adequate behavior monitored for use of lorazepam for Resident 1.These above failures had the potential to place sampled resident at risk to receive unnecessary psychotropic medication.Findings:1.Review of Resident 1's face sheet (FS: a document that gives resident's information at a quick glance) indicated Resident 1 was admitted to…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-19 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure to notify primary care physician (PCP) for refusal of blood tests (a laboratory analysis of a blood sample used to assess various aspects of resident's health) as ordered by the physician for one of three sampled resident (Resident 1) to meet professional standards.This failure had the potential to affect Resident 1's medical condition and well-being.Findings:Review of Resident 1's face sheet (FS: a document that gives resident's information at a quick glance) indicated, Resident 2 was admitted to facility on 7/9/2024.Review of Resident 1's medical diagnoses included diabetes type 2 (high blood sugar levels), chronic kidney (bean shaped body organ, filters waste and extra fluids from blood to produce urine) disease (a long term condition where the kidneys gradually lose tier ability to function properly), and atrial fibrillation (an irregular, often rapid heart rate that commonly causes poor blood flow).Review of Resident 1's order summary report indicated basic metabolic (a blood test that measures several key…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-02-12 · tag F0637 — isolated
  Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview, record review, and document review, the facility failed to complete a significant change in status assessment (SCSA) Minimum Data Set (MDS) for 1 (Resident #51) of 2 sampled residents reviewed for nutrition. Findings included: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Long -Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument [RAI] 3.0 User's Manual dated 10/2024, indicated, 03. Significant Change in Status Assessment The SCSA is a comprehensive assessment for a resident that must be completed when the IDT [interdisciplinary team] has determined that a resident meets the significant change guidelines for either major improvement or decline. Per the manual, A significant change is a major decline or improvement in a resident's status that: 1. Will not normally resolve itself without intervention by staff or by implementing standard disease-related clinical interventions, the decline is not considered self-limiting; 2. Impacts more than one area of the resident's health status; and 3. Required interdisciplinary review and/or revision of the care plan. According to…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-12-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow it's Policy and Procedure titled Isolation-Categories of Transmission- Based Precautions, when the facility failed to provide evidence of implementing isolation precautions (process of creating barriers between people and germs to help prevent the spread of infectious microbes) during an outbreak of infectious gastrointestinal related illnesses for four of six sampled residents (Resident 1, Resident 2, Resident 3 & Resident 4). This failure had the potential to spread infectious disease to other residents and staff at the facility. Findings: During an interview on 12/2/24, at 9:35 a.m., with Infection Prevention Nurse (IP), IP stated, the care staff reported multiple residents with vomiting and diarrhea during the night shift in early October. IP stated, she became aware of the outbreak because it was documented in a change of condition report. IP stated, they began testing residents for C-diff (Clostridium difficile a bacterium that causes an infection of the colon, spread through physical contact) and Norovirus…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2023-10-13 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive, person-centered, care plans for four of thirty-one residents investigated, (Residents 14, 41, 160 and 18) when: 1. Residents 14 and 41, the activity care plans did not specify the activities provided, there were no frequency of visits for the activities, and no measurable outcomes of the visits; 2. Resident 160, there were no interventions that were developed in the activity care plan, and 3. Resident 18, there was no care plan to address her excessive sleepiness issue. These failures had the potential to result in the residents, not receiving the interventions necessary to maintain their highest level of well-being. Findings: 1. Review of Resident 14's clinical record indicated, Resident 14 was an [AGE] year-old female with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease (a progressive disease that destroys memory and other important mental functions), type 2 diabetes mellitus (adult onset, high blood sugar)…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-10-13 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — pattern
  Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure care and services were provided in accordance with professional standards of practice for three of 15 sampled residents (Residents 16, 18, and 21) when: 1. Resident 16, there were two duplicated insulin orders without parameters; 2. Resident 18, the treatment nurse did not label the dressing with the date, time, and initial and; 3. Resident 21, the licensed nurse did not refill her eye drop medicine on time and caused six missed treatments. These failures had the potential to negatively affect the residents' health and well-being. Findings: 1. A review of Resident 16's clinical record indicated Resident 16 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes mellitus (type 2 DM, adult onset high blood sugar) with diabetic neuropathy (the presence of symptoms or signs of peripheral nerve dysfunction in people with diabetes), type 2 diabetes mellitus with unspecified diabetic retinopathy (an eye condition that can cause…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-10-13 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — pattern
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents received the necessary care and services for five of 15 residents (2, 8, 20, 22, and 37) when: 1. Licensed nurses did not follow the physician's order for pain medication based on the resident's pain level for Resident 2; 2. A bottle of gel hand sanitizer was on Resident 8's night stand in her room; 3. Licensed nurse did not follow the physician's order for oxygen supplement for Resident 20; 4. Licensed vocational nurse G (LVN G) did not know how to monitor Resident 22's AV fistula (a special connection that is made by joining a vein onto an artery, usually in the arm) and what to do if it was bleeding; and 5. LVN G did not know how to monitor the signs and symptoms if the pacemaker would malfunction for Resident 37. These failures had the potential to affect the residents' care and could jeopardize their health and well-being. Findings: 1. Review of Resident 2's admission Record indicated she was admitted to the…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-10-13 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper medication storage and labeling of medications when: 1. unlabeled, discontinued, and expired medications were not removed from the medication carts to prevent medication errors; 2. medications were not labeled with full names or open date; 3. an insulin glargine injection pen (medication to lower blood sugar) did not have a patient-specific label; 4. two bottles of normal saline, and a cup with itching medication were left inside the resident's room. These deficient practices had the potential for residents, to receive medications with unsafe and reduced potency, from using them past their discard date and medication errors due to medications not being labeled or removed from active stock. Findings: 1. During an inspection of medication cart one on 10/9/2023 at 12:40 p.m., with the Nurse Supervisor (NS), the NS confirmed the following findings: a) an Enoxaparin sodium (anticoagulant medication) injection 40mg (milligram, a…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2023-10-13 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
  Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure food palatability was maintained, when three of nine residents investigated, (Residents 3, 155 and 161), complained about the taste of the food being served. This failure had the potential to result in decreased food intake and weight loss, compromising the resident's nutritional status. Findings: 1. During a concurrent observation and interview of Resident 3 on 10/9/23 at 11:30 a.m., Resident 3 was laying in her bed, alert, oriented, calm and comfortable. She's on oxygen inhalation (therapy that provides extra air to breathe in) at 2 liters per minute via nasal cannula (device used to deliver supplemental or air to a resident). Resident 3 stated that she did not like the food, it had no flavor or taste. She said that she told the dietary manager in training (DMIT) already about it but nothing was done. Review of Resident 3's clinical record indicated, Resident 3 was an [AGE] year-old female, admitted to the facility last 12/19/22,…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-10-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure food was stored in accordance with professional standards for food safety when: 1. one 8-ounce water bottle brought by employee, was in Freezer #1; 2. one plastic bag with 7 frozen beef strips inside, had no used by date; and 3. the temperature of Refrigerator #2 was 50 degrees Fahrenheit (F, temperature scale). These failures had the potential to cause the growth of micro-organisms which could cause foodborne illness for the 56 residents eating at the facility. Findings: 1. During an observation and interview with the dietary manager in training (DMIT) on 10/9/23 at 8:50 a.m., one 8-ounce water bottle brought by employee, was in Freezer #1. The DMIT stated that personal water bottle should have not put inside kitchen freezer. Review of the facility's undated policy, Employee meals, indicated, Policy: Food brought by employees from outside the facility should have not kept in the facility's refrigerator in the kitchen nor prepared or reheated in the facility's kitchen. Procedure: Employees bringing…

  This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ASPEN SKILLED HEALTHCARE — 35 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 30 rows in the source record cover these 20 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

7 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

This home reported $737K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in CA