Oakcrest Nursing And Rehabilitation Center
9808 Crofford Ln, Austin, TX 78724 · For profit - Corporation · 67 certified beds · (512) 272-5511 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (34% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 3 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (22) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $31,959 in federal fines (most recent 2024-07-17)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
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.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 2.9% | 15.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.0% | 3.0% | 5.4% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 4.6% | 2.4% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 1.6% | 3.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 7.6% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 47.2% | 18.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 93.8% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.0% | 3.8% | 4.7% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 28.1% | 13.4% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 67.3% | 9.6% | 17.1% | check this† — see note marked dagger below the table |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.03 | 2.17 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.41 | 2.06 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
† This value is several times the typical-state benchmark. It can be real, or it can be a coding artifact in what the facility submitted. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.40 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 69% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% 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.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 67 beds and averages 62.9 residents a day — about 94% 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 2.68 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.43 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.84 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 2.49 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.76 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.47 to 0.34 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 34% is below 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 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.
22 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 9 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-07-17 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 5 of 5 residents (Resident #43, Resident #47 , Resident #52, Resident #57, and Resident #67) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. These failures could place residents at risk of not having individual needs met, a decreased quality of life, causes residents not to receive needed services and death. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #47's care plan was comprehensive and updated to reflect he needed assistance with feeding and was a choking risk. An IT was identified on 07/16/2024 at 12:00 PM. The IT template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 12:47 PM. The IT was removed on 07/17/2024, the facility remained in violation at a scope…
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.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-07-17 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 (Resident #47) of 5 residents reviewed for accidents. The failed to ensure resident #47 was being monitored during meal intake resulting Resident #47 choking and ultimately passing away. This failure could result in other residents not getting the assistance or the supervision needed when they have swallowing difficulties and could also lead to severe injury and/or death. An IT was identified on 07/16/2024 at 12:00 PM. The IT template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 12:47 PM. The IT was removed on 07/17/2024, the facility remained in violation at a scope of pattern and a severity level of no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is not immediate because the facility failed to Findings included: Record review of Resident #47's face sheet dated 06/27/2024 revealed Resident #47 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-04-10 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistant device to prevent accidents for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accident hazards/supervision. Resident #1 walked out of the facility unattended on 04/01/24 at 8:08PM and remained missing as on 04/10/24 at 3:00PM. LVN B failed to physically check during the two-hour monitoring to ensure Resident #1 was in the building during and after his elopement. An IJ was identified on 04/03/24 at 5:00PM. The IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 6:00PM. While the IJ was removed on 04/05/24 at 9:12AM, the facility remained out of compliance at a scope of isolated and a severity level of no actual ham but potential for harm as the resident was missing as on 04/10/24. This failure could affect residents and place them at risk of not receiving the appropriate level of supervision to prevent physical harm, pain and accidents. Findings Included: Record review of…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-12 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
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 provide a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment for 1 of 8 (Resident #2) residents reviewed for resident rights.1. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #2's room was free from standing urine and bugs on 3/11/2026.2. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #2's curtain was clean and free of stains on 3/11/2026.3. The facility failed to ensure the flooring was not damaged in the east hallway on 3/11/2026.These failures placed residents at risk for an unclean, unsafe, and uncomfortable environment.Findings included:A record review of Resident #2's face sheet dated 3/11/2026 reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of unspecified dementia (neurocognitive disease), bipolar disorder (manic depression), other schizophrenia (psychosis), cerebral infarction (stroke), type 2 diabetes (uncontrolled blood sugar), major depressive disorder (depression), Alzheimer's disease (neurocognitive disease), and…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-12 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident for 1 of 8 (Resident #1) residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans.The facility failed to include Resident #1's history of trauma, history of delusions, and diagnoses of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder were captured in her comprehensive care plan.This failure placed residents at risk of not receiving interventions to address their diagnoses and trauma.Findings included:A record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 3/12/2026 reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of cognitive communication deficit (difficulty communicating), restlessness and agitation, unspecified dementia (neurocognitive disorder), bipolar disorder (manic depression), and schizoaffective disorder (psychosis).A record review of Resident #1's MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a BIMS score of 15, which indicated intact cognition.A record review of…
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.
- Potential for harm · F2025-08-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 interview, observation and record review the facility failed to maintain infection control practices during food preparation for 1 of 1 meal observed for meal preparation. The DS failed to maintain infection control practice by:1. The DS failed to complete hand hygiene appropriately.2. The DS failed to sanitize the thermometer with a clean alcohol swab between food items. 3. The DS failed to sanitize the thermometer after touching another surface with the thermometer. These failures could result in cross contamination or food allergies. Findings Include: An observation was conducted on 08/06/2025 at 11:25AM while the DS pureed the food for lunch. The DS had placed the chicken into the puree blender and completed the puree process. After the DS emptied the chicken out of the blender, the DS moved onto the next food item to puree. This process was continued through 3 more menu items at which the DS did not wash their hands in between food items. An observation was conducted on 08/06/2025 at 11:45AM while the DS took temperatures of the food items. The DS used an alcohol swab…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-08-07 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to establish a person-centered care plan for 3 of 3 (Resident #52, Resident #7 and Resident #35) residents reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #52, Resident #7 and Resident #35 had a person-centered care plan developed and implemented to meet the resident's medical, physical, mental and psychosocial needs, including the diagnosis of Dementia/Alzheimer's. This failure could result in residents not getting the specialized care that they need for their diagnosis. Findings Include: RR of Resident #52's undated face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnosis included Alzheimer's Disease (progressive brain disorder that gradually destroys memory and thinking skills), Cognitive Deficit Disorder (decline in a person's mental abilities, impacting their thinking, learning, memory, and other cognitive functions), and Generalized Anxiety Disorder. RR of Resident #52's Care Plan last…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-08-07 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
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 provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for 5 of 7 residents (Resident #50, Resident #24, Resident #20, Resident #35 and Resident #11) reviewed for pharmaceutical services. The facility failed to document the administration of controlled medications from the medication cart on the narcotic count sheets for Resident #50, Resident #24, Resident #20, Resident #35 and Resident #11.This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving a therapeutic dosage of medication, drug diversion, and overdose.Findings include:Observation on 08/06/2025 at 11:33 AM during medication administration revealed LVN C was observed not signing out the controlled substances on the narcotic sheets for each resident: Resident #50 received Tramadol 50mg 1 tablet by mouth for pain, Resident #24 received Ativan 0.5mg 1 tablet by mouth for anxiety, Resident #20 received Tramadol…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-08-07 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with professional standards, including expiration dates for 1 (MR E) of 2 medication rooms and 1 (MC A) of 3 med carts reviewed for pharmaceutical services.1. A supplement drink named Med Pass 2.0 + was left opened and dated, and not on ice inside of MC A.2. Over the counter medications (OTC) that had been opened, had no date indicating when they were opened in MR E This failure could lead to medication not being effective, and therefore impacting resident health. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with professional standards, including expiration dates for 1 (MR E) of 2 medication rooms and 1 (MC A) of 3 med carts reviewed for pharmaceutical services.1. A supplement drink named Med Pass 2.0 + was left opened and dated, and not on ice inside of MC A.2. Over the counter medications (OTC) that had been…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-08-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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 establish and 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 5 of 7 residents (Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #46, Resident #22, and Resident #52) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure LVN E cleansed her hands by handwashing/hand hygiene with alcohol-based rub before and after blood sugar checks for Resident #2 and Resident #462. The facility failed to ensure CNA B was cleansing male residents properly and conducting hand hygiene and glove change during peri-care for Resident #22 and Resident #52.3. The facility failed to ensure LVN D were following prescribed Enhanced Barrier Precautions by not putting on a gown before providing wound care to Resident #3.These failures could place residents at risk of transmission of disease and…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-07 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
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 that the facility maintained a home-like environment for 2 of 2 (Resident # 2, Resident # 63) Residents reviewed for home-like environment. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #2's and Resident #63's bedroom was home-like and free from worn and destroyed walls. This failure could result in psychological distress and feeling uncomfortable in the facility. Findings Included: RR of Resident #2 's undated face sheet revealed a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #2 had a diagnosis of Type II Diabetes Mellites (chronic condition where the body doesn't use insulin properly, leading to high blood sugar levels), Schizophrenia (severe mental disorder that affects how a person thinks, feels, and behaves), and Muscle Weakness. RR of Resident #2's MDS record dated 05/25/2025 revealed the resident had a BIMS score of 15 which indicate no cognitive impairment. RR of Resident #63's undated face sheet revealed 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-07 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
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 that its medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for medication administration. 1. LVN E did not check with order for the parameters on the chart; only on the medication label itself before administering insulin to Resident #3.2. The CMA did not administer two medications (Ferrous Sulfate 325mg 1 tablet every day and Cholecalciferol 25mcg 1 tablet one time a day) to Resident #3.This failure could potentially exacerbate the residents' diagnosis and lead to hospitalization.Findings included:Resident #3Record review of Resident #3's undated face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included diabetes mellitus type 2, osteomyelitis (bone infection), acquired absence of left great toe, vascular dementia, hypertension (high blood pressure), cerebral infarction (stroke), and muscle weakness.Record review of Resident #3's…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-07 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
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 that a call light was accessible while in bed for 1 of 1 (Resident #2) Residents reviewed for call lights. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #2 had a call light next to their bed. This failure could result in a resident not being able to call for help during an emergency. Findings Included: RR of Resident #2 's undated face sheet revealed a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #2 had a diagnosis of Type II Diabetes Mellites, Schizophrenia, and Muscle Weakness. RR of Resident #2's MDS record dated 05/25/2025 revealed the resident had a BIMS score of 15 which indicate no cognitive impairment. An observation was conducted on 08/05/2025 at 12:30PM in Resident #2's bedroom where a call light was missing from the call light spot located between the two resident's beds. It was observed that Resident #2's roommate had a call light next to their bed, but not for Resident #2. An observation was conducted…
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.
Show the remaining 9 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-07-17 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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 all alleged violations involving neglect were reported immediately or within 2 hours if the alleged violation involved abuse or neglect resulted in bodily injury, to other officials for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #47) reviewed for abuse and neglect in that: The facility failed to report to the State agency when Resident #47 had an incident of choking on 05/16/2024. He was pronounced dead at the facility by EMS on 05/16/2024 at 6:04 PM. This failure could place current residents on a mechanically altered diet at risk of having an incident go unreported and uninvestigated. Findings included: Record Review of Resident #47's face sheet dated 06/27/2024 revealed Resident #47 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses Nausea with vomiting, depressive disorder, reflux, high level of fat particles in the blood, Urinary tract infection, brain disease, vitamin D deficiency, pre-diabetes, constipation, dementia, inflammatory disorder of 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-17 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
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, interviews, and record review the facility failed to accurately and safely provide or obtain pharmaceutical services, including the provision of routine and emergency medications and biologicals for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #1) reviewed for pharmacy services and procedures in that: The facility failed to ensure medication administered to a resident #1 was properly administered and not left in the room. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving their physician ordered medications resulting in a decreased quality of life. Findings include: Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 06/27/24 revealed an [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease-unspecified (brain disorder that causes problems with memory, thinking, and behavior), Parkinson's disease (disorder that affects the nervous system and causes movement problems), unspecified psychosis (condition of the mind that results in difficulties determining what is real and…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-05-03 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — patternProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
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 provide, based on the comprehensive assessment and care plan and the preferences of each resident, an ongoing program to support residents in their choice of activities, both facility-sponsored group and individual activities and independent activities, designed to meet the interests of and support the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, encouraging both independence and interaction in the community for six of 24 (Residents #6, #13, #15, #39, #44 and #52 ) residents reviewed for activities. 1. The facility failed to develop an activity program based on the preferences and suggestions of the resident population. 2. The facility failed to provide activities as scheduled on their activity calendar. 3. The facility failed to ensure in-room activities for Residents #15, #39, and #52, who spent most of or all their time in their rooms. These failures placed residents at risk of boredom, depression, increased…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-05-03 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remains as free of accident hazards as is possible for one of two wings (West) reviewed and three of five posted evacuation routes reviewed. 1. The facility failed to updated floor plans with evacuation route when they closed two of the facility's seven fire exits due to construction. 2. The facility failed to ensure that boards nailed over a non-functioning exit door were free of broken, splintered ends accessible to residents on the [NAME] wing. These failures placed residents at risk of injury. Findings included: 1. Observation on 05/01/23 at 07:33 AM, revealed a set of double doors in the facility lobby blocked with an upright piano. The Exit sign over the doors was covered, and the area outside the doors was filled with construction materials. Observation on 05/01/23 at 07:41 AM, revealed a door at one end of the [NAME] wing of the facility near rooms 29-32. Several wooden boards were nailed across the door making egress impossible. The Exit sign over the door was covered.…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-05-03 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
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 provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, staff and the public for one of two wings (West) reviewed and three of five posted evacuation routes reviewed. 1. The facility failed to updated floor plans with evacuation route when they closed two of the facility's seven fire exits due to construction. 2. The facility failed to ensure that boards nailed over a non-functioning exit door were free of broken, splintered ends accessible to residents on the [NAME] wing. These failures placed residents at risk of injury. Findings included: 1. Observation on 05/01/23 at 07:33 AM, revealed a set of double doors in the facility lobby blocked with an upright piano. The Exit sign over the doors was covered, and the area outside the doors was filled with construction materials. Observation on 05/01/23 at 07:41 AM, revealed a door at one end of the [NAME] wing of the facility near rooms 29-32. Several wooden boards were nailed across the door making egress impossible. The Exit sign over…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-03 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor 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 promote care for residents in a manner and in an environment that maintained or enhanced each resident's dignity for one (Resident #32) of 24 residents reviewed for dignity, in that: LVN A was standing over Resident #32 while assisting him for breakfast. This deficient practice could affect residents by placing them at risk for diminished quality of life, loss of dignity and decline in self-esteem. Findings include: Review of Resident #32's face sheet revealed a [AGE] year-old male with admission date of 11/02/2018. Diagnoses include dysphagia (Dysphagia is difficulty swallowing - taking more time and effort to move food or liquid from your mouth to your stomach), Gastro-esophageal reflux disease without esophagitis (GERD- occurs when stomach acid repeatedly flows back into the tube connecting your mouth and stomach (esophagus). Review of Resident #32's MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 06, which indicated he was…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-03 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 6 of 24 (Residents #6, #13, #15, #39, #44, and #52) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to provide care planning for activities for Residents #6, #13, #15, #39, #44, and #52. This failure placed residents at risk of not having their recreational needs met. Findings included: Review of the undated face sheet for Resident #6 reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of major depressive disorder, schizophrenia, and cognitive communication deficit. Review of the annual MDS for Resident #6 dated 09/17/22 reflected a BIMS score of 10, indicating a mild cognitive impairment. Section F of the MDS reflected a staff…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-03 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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 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 of one (Resident #17) resident and 1 of 1 nurse (LVN A) observed for G-Tube medication administration. LVN A failed to maintain the G-tube tubing tip and syringe plunger clean while administering G-Tube medication. This failure could place residents with G-tubes at risk of decline in health due to inappropriate G-tube care and infection. Findings include: Review of Resident #17's face sheet revealed a 75-years-old female DOB [DATE] with admission date of 07/06/2011 and readmission date of 07/28/2022. Diagnoses include Esophageal reflux, Dysphagia (Dysphagia is difficulty swallowing - taking more time and effort to move food or liquid from your mouth to your stomach) Review of Resident #17's MDS assessment dated [DATE]…
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.
- No harm found · C2023-05-03 · tag F0732 — widespreadPost nurse staffing information every day.
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 post nurse staffing data on a daily basis at the beginning of each shift in a clear and readable format and in a prominent place readily accessible to residents and visitors for two of three days of the recertification survey. The facility failed to post nurse staffing information on 05/02/23 and 05/01/23. This failure placed residents and visitors at risk of being unaware of the facility daily staffing requirements. Findings included: Observation on 05/01/23 at 07:10 AM and 01:23 PM revealed no posted nurse staffing in any public, visible place in the facility. Observation on 05/02/23 at 09:02 AM and 02:40 PM revealed no posted nurse staffing in any public, visible place in the facility. During observation and an interview on 05/02/23 at 02:42 PM, the DON stated he did not know where the nurse staffing information was posted. He went to the nurse's station on the east wing and asked LVN A if she knew, and she went through some papers in…
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.
“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.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$31,959 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $20,909 — penalty dated 2024-07-17
- $11,050 — penalty dated 2024-04-10
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PELEG, NANA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 06/10/2016 |
| ROYAL BLUE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/09/2016 |
| CHUDLEIGH, JAMES | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/01/2016 |
| HERZOG, HELMUT | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/09/2016 |
| ZAMORA, PEDRO | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 7 rows in the source record cover these 5 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
1 organizational owner 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 91% 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 $206K 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
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Texas Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 676291. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-07, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.