Victoria Gardens Of Allen

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.

41.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 58 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 50.0% 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 32 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 0.92 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 96% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 1% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 120 beds and averages 87.2 residents a day — about 73% occupied, or roughly 33 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 3.28 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.28 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.07 is below 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 2.80 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.48 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.28 to 0.30 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 54% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.

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

• Potential for harm · E2026-06-28 · 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 record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food safety 1 of 1 kitchen. 1. The facility failed to ensure food items were labeled and dated in the walk-in refrigerator.2. The facility failed to ensure expired food items were not in the walk-in refrigerator.3. The Dietary Manager failed to ensure lunch food temperatures were checked on the steam table line. These failures could place residents at risk of food contamination and food-borne illness.Findings included: During an observation on 06/28/26 at 9:12 AM, the following food items were observed in the walk-in refrigerator:Undated and unlabeled hamburger patties in an aluminum container;2 pounds of undated Sliced Smoke Turkey Breast in a resealable food storage bag;3 undated chicken salad sandwiches in resealable food storage bag;2 resealable plastic containers of chicken salad dated 06/14/26;1 resealable plastic container of chili dated 06/20/26;Sliced pickles in resealable food storage bag dated 06/23/26; and1…

  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 · D2026-04-14 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  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 resident had a right to a dignified existence, self-determination, and communication with and access to persons and services inside and outside the facility for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for resident rights.The facility failed to ensure staff didn't tell Resident #1 to use her brief to go to the bathroom.This failure could place residents at risk of a decrease in quality of life.Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 04/14/26, reflected an [AGE] year-old female who was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included cerebral infraction-unspecified (type of stroke caused by a blockage of blood flow to the brain), Dementia (is a syndrome characterized by a decline in cognitive function, affecting memory, thinking behavior, and the ability to perform every day activities), depression unspecified (a person…

  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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
  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

  Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure, in accordance with State and Federal laws, all drugs and biologicals were stored in locked compartments under proper temperature controls, permitted only authorized personnel to have access to the for 2 (MC#1 and TC#2) of 3 carts on 04/14/26.This failure could place residents at risk of drug diversion. Findings include:During an observation on 04/14/26 at 6:45 AM, it was revealed that the medication cart was left unlocked with the drawer facing outward at the nursing station. Surveyor did not observed staff at the nursing station or within view of Medication Cart#1 and Treatment Cart#2. Surveyor observed that Treatment Cart#2 was unlocked and was adjacent from the nursing station with the drawer's facing outward toward the hallway.During an interview on 04/14/26 at 7:00 AM, LVN G stated he had an emergency and stepped away from the medication cart. LVN G stated the treatment cart stayed unlocked for emergencies. LVN G stated residents with Dementia could take medication from the medication cart and it needed to be…

  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 · E2026-02-11 · tag F0645 — pattern
  PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
  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 interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure all Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) level 1 residents with mental illness were provided with a PASRR level 2 evaluation for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #8), reviewed for resident assessment.Resident #8's PASRR level 1 screening form did not reflect mental illness, and the resident did not have a PASRR level II evaluation .This could place residents at risk of not receiving necessary specialized services to meet their individual needs.The findings were:Record review of Resident #8's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 01/15/2026, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's BIMs score was 15 indicating the resident's cognition was intact. Her diagnoses included Bipolar Disorder (mental condition marked by alternating periods of elation and depression), Generalized Anxiety Disorder (disorder characterized by feelings of worry, anxiety, or fear that are enough to interfere with…

  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 · D2026-02-11 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  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, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that a resident receives treatment and care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's choices for one (Resident #95) of four residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to ensure RN I completed wound cares to Resident #95 per physician orders. This failure placed residents at risk for the decline in quality of life and the wounds being infected or deteriorating.Review of Resident #95's face sheet dated 02/11/26 revealed he was a [AGE] year-old male, and he was admitted on [DATE]. Admitting diagnoses included, type 2 diabetes, acquired abscess of the left toe, peripheral vascular disease, and chronic osteomyelitis (Reduced blood flow (ischemia) from narrowed arteries limits immune response) left ankle and foot. Review of Resident #95's admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected he had a BIMS score of 15, indicating no cognitive impairment.…

  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 · Dcited before2026-02-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  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 maintain an infection control program designed to prevent the development and transmission of infection for one of six residents (Resident #75) observed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure CNA D completed hand hygiene while providing incontinence care to Resident # 75. This failure could place the residents at risk of infection.Record review of Resident #75's face sheet dated 02/11/26 reflected a [AGE] year-old female. She was admitted to the facility 01/14/26. Admitting diagnoses included hypertension, pressure ulcer to the sacrum area (located at the base of the spine) muscle weakness, neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder (person lacks bladder control)and muscle wasting and atrophy. Review of Resident #75's care plan initiated 01/14/26 reflected Resident #75 had bowel/bladder incontinence related to disease process, impaired mobility and neurogenic disorder (conditions that target how your nervous system). Goal, 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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-01-20 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible for 9 rooms (Rooms 104, 105, 108, 209, 212, 306, 307, and 312) of 30 rooms reviewed for accident hazards. The facility failed to ensure the needle sharps containers (which are specialized receptacles designed to safely dispose of sharp medical instruments that can cause injuries or infections) in Rooms 104, 105, 108, 209, 212, 306, 307, and 312 were emptied.This failure could place residents at risk of being injured by a needle, and exposure to bloodborne pathogens. Findings included: Observation on 01/20/26 from 10:00 AM to 11:00 AM revealed all resident rooms have a sharps container mounted inside the resident room by the door. Rooms # 104, 105, 108, 209, 212, 306, 307, and 312, (which were occupied by residents) were noted to have been filled past the Fill line to the point the security flap could not operate. Interview on 01/20/26 at 11:25 AM, LVN A stated the nurses were responsible for replacing sharp containers when…

  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 · D2026-01-20 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  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 interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure resident records were maintained for each resident that were complete; accurately documented, readily accessible; and systematically organized for 1 of 9 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for resident records.LVN B failed to document a telephone order from the physician for Resident #1's cough medicine, guaifenesin.This failure could result in residents not receiving the medication ordered. Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's quarterly MDS, date [DATE], revealed she was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included emphysema, lung cancer, end stage kidney disease requiring dialysis, and diabetes. Record review of Resident #1's care plan, dated [DATE], revealed she had a self-care deficit, had a tumor in her lungs, and went to dialysis every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. Record review of Resident #1's EHR revealed the resident expired in the evening of [DATE] at the hospital. Record…

  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 · Dcited before2024-12-07 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents, who needed respiratory care, were provided such care consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for two (Resident #1 and Resident #2) of five residents reviewed for Respiratory Care. 1. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #1's breathing mask for nebulization was properly stored on 12/07/2024. 2. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #2's nasal cannula (flexible tube used to deliver oxygen to the nose through two prongs) was properly stored on 12/07/2024. These failures could place the residents at risk for respiratory infection and not having their respiratory needs met. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #1's Face Sheet, dated 12/07/2024, reflected the resident was an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. Resident #1 was diagnosed with chronic respiratory failure (airway to lungs becomes narrow…

  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 · Dcited before2024-12-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an Infection Prevention and Control Program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for one (Resident #2) of five residents reviewed for Infection Control. The facility failed to ensure that CNA B changed his gloves and performed hand hygiene while providing incontinent care to Resident #2 on 12/07/2024. This failure could place the residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of infections. Findings included: Review of Resident #2's Face Sheet, dated 12/07/2024, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. Resident #2 was diagnosed with muscle weakness and muscle atrophy (decrease in size of a body part). Review of Resident #2's Comprehensive MDS Assessment, dated 10/22/2024, reflected the resident was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 13. Resident #2's Comprehensive…

  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

“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 PRIORITY MANAGEMENT — 38 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 36 rows in the source record cover these 20 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

8 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.

About 74% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $447K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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 TX