No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Sedona Trace Health and Wellness Center

8324 Cameron Rd, Austin, TX 78754 · For profit - Corporation · 119 certified beds · (737) 241-0800 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
1 immediate-jeopardy citation$11,168 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $11,168 in federal fines (most recent 2024-06-14)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)

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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Urgent care / clinic
1536 E Anderson Ln · (512) 832-4119 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
8601 Cross Park Dr Ste 400 · (512) 823-2000 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Cameron Rd · (512) 339-6008 · Call to confirm hours
Park
8101 Cameron Rd · (512) 302-4500 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 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 fell from 5 to 4 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.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased29.7%15.8%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.4%3.0%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.3%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.3%0.8%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms4.4%2.4%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.9%3.3%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened44.6%14.0%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication10.7%18.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine93.7%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.8%3.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control17.8%13.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table3.5%9.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.8%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.5%88.0%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission21.8%25.7%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit7.2%12.3%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.002.171.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.702.061.80better

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.

49.3% 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 96 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

49.3%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.1%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
54.4%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
1.24U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.53hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.46hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.25hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 54.4% 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 92 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 1.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 98% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF49.3%CMS range 40.6–60.751.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.1%CMS range 8.2–14.810.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge54.4%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge48.9%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge44.6%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified64.9%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting93.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this 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 discharge96.8%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened1.5%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.3%CMS range 4.4–13.47.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.191.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this 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

0.42
RN hours/ resident / day
0.66
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.96
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.04
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.25
RN hoursweekends
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 119 beds and averages 113.2 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 3.04 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.42 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.96 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 2.59 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.22 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.49 to 0.25 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

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

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-07-24)
7
at the previous standard inspection (2024-06-14)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

16 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2024-06-14 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolated
    Make 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to adequately equip to allow residents to call for staff assistance through a communication system which relays the call directly to a staff member to a centralized staff work area for 2 (Resident #34 and 48) of 6 residents reviewed for call lights, in that: The facility failed to ensure Residents #34 and 48's bathroom and shower call lights operated on 06/11/24. An IJ was identified on 06/11/24. The IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 7:32 P.M. While the IJ was removed on 06/13/24, the facility remained out of compliance at a scope of isolated and a severity level of actual harm that is not immediate jeopardy because of the facility need to evaluate the effectiveness of its corrective actions. This failure could place residents at risk for injury, accidents, not having needs met, and death. Findings included: Record review of Resident #34's admission Record, dated 06/11/24, revealed an [AGE] year-old female who 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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-05-12 · tag F0551 — isolated
    Give the resident's representative the ability to exercise the resident's 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's responsible party has the right to exercise the resident's rights for one (Resident #1) of seven residents reviewed for resident rights.The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's POA, FM A, notified when the resident was discharged from facility with FM B.This failure could place residents at risk of not having their preferred responsible party represent them in a medical, nursing care and safe discharge decisions.Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 05/12/26 revealed a [AGE] year-old female, admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis of pneumonia, anemia, major depressive disorder, muscle weakness, reduced mobility and need for assistance with personal care. It was also revealed that FM A was one of the two POAs for financial and care and emergency contact #1 and FM B the emergency contact #2 ,sharing POA rights with FM A.Record review of Statutory Durable Power of Attorney executed on…

    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 · D2026-05-12 · tag F0627 — isolated
    Ensure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/discharge.
    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 record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to provide and document sufficient preparation and orientation to residents to ensure safe and orderly transfer or discharge from the facility for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for safe transfer or discharge.The facility failed to ensure the safety of Resident #1 when she was discharged on 04/26/26 with FM B. This failure could result in the safety of the residents who are discharged from the facility.Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 05/12/26 revealed a [AGE] year-old female, admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis of pneumonia, anemia, major depressive disorder, muscle weakness, reduced mobility and need for assistance with personal care. It was also revealed that FM A was one of the two POAs for financial, care and emergency contact #1 and FM B the emergency contact #2 ,sharing POA rights with FM A.Record review of Statutory Durable Power of Attorney executed on 09/14/2010, duly signed by Resident #1 revealed that…

    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 · D2025-07-24 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide 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 observations, interviews, 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 1 of 1 (100/200-Hall) medication room reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure expired medical supplies were removed from 100/200-hall medication storage room on 07/24/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of receiving medication using expired medical supplies, increased pain due to dull needles, and/or infection due to contamination of expired medical supplies. Findings included: Observation on 07/24/2025 at 11:13 AM of the 100/200-hall medication room revealed the following:One 24G x 3/4 in. safety IV catheter with an expiration date of 03/31/2024,One disposable syringe without needle with an expiration date of 11/10/2024,One 20G x 1 in. safety IV catheter with an expiration date of 12/22/2024,Three 1-ml tuberculin safety syringe with needle with expiration dates of 12/31/2024,…

    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 · D2025-06-16 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to provide specialized habilitation services and failed to obtain specialized durable medical equipment for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for PASRR (Preadmission Screening Resident Review) services. The facility failed to request a customized mattress within 20 business days after the IDT meeting for Resident #1. This failure could put resident at risk of not receiving the needed care and services to attain or maintain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's undated face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including unspecified convulsion (involuntary muscle contraction caused by abnormal brain activity. They can be symptom of epilepsy, fever, infection, injury or medication), Developmental Disorder of scholastic skills (group of conditions that hinder the acquisition of fundamental academic abilities),…

    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 · D2024-06-24 · tag F0626 — isolated
    Permit a resident to return to the nursing home after hospitalization or therapeutic leave that exceeds bed-hold policy.
    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 and follow a written policy on permitting residents to return to the facility after they are hospitalized or placed on therapeutic leave for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for discharges, in that: The facility failed to readmit Resident #1 and provide or document sufficient preparation for an orderly discharge when Resident #1 was sent to a behavioral health hospital on [DATE]. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving care and services to meet their needs upon discharge, injury, and rehospitalization. Findings Included: Review of Resident #1's undated face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease (a brain disorder that gets worse over time) with early onset, personal history of Traumatic Brain Injury, schizoaffective disorder (a mental disorder characterized by abnormal thought processes and an unstable mood), major…

    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 · E2024-06-14 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — pattern
    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 reviews, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needed respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning, was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, the residents' goals and preferences, and 483.65 of this subpart and ensure infection control measures during implementation of care, handling, cleaning, storage and disposal of equipment, supplies, biohazardous waste and including infection control practices for mechanical ventilation/tracheostomy care including the use of humidifiers were followed by staff for 3 (Residents #5, #36, and #77) of 7 residents reviewed for respiratory care, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #5, #36 and #77's nasal cannulas and tubing were properly stored when not in use. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of cross-contamination and illness. Findings included: Record review of Resident #5's admission…

    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 · E2024-06-14 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safely for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for food storage and sanitation, in that: 1. The facility failed to ensure kitchen staff secured their hair in hairnets in the kitchen. 2. The facility failed to clean the inside of the one ice machine. 3. The facility failed to discard expired food and beverage items in the walk-in refrigerator. 4. The facility failed to ensure the freezer unit in the walk-in freezer was maintained in safe operating condition . These deficient practices could place residents at risk of foodborne illness. Findings included: An observation of the kitchen on 06/11/24 9:12 A.M. revealed [NAME] G's hairnet was sitting on top of her head. The hairnet covered the top half of [NAME] G's hair, leaving the bottom half not protected or covered. An observation of the ice machine on 06/11/24 at 9:17 A.M. revealed there were black spots on the top ceiling inside the ice machine. An observation 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-14 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    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 the residents rights to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #50 and Resident #71) reviewed for advanced directives. The facility failed to ensure Resident #50's out of hospital do-not-resuscitate (OOH-DNR) form included the resident's printed name and date signed. The facility failed to ensure Resident #71's Medical Power of Attorney (MPOA) included all pages and was signed, dated, and witnessed or notarized to confirm it was valid. These failures could place residents at-risk of having their wishes dishonored or delay necessary medical treatment or intervention due to confusion regarding authority to make medical decisions on behalf of the resident. Findings included: Record review of Resident #50's face sheet dated 06/13/2024 reflected an initial admission date of 05/27/2021 with diagnoses 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-14 · tag F0636 — isolated
    Assess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
    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 complete a comprehensive, accurate, and standardized reproducible assessment for 2 (Resident #86 and Resident #88) of 3 residents reviewed for comprehensive assessments. The facility failed to include Resident #86's cancer diagnosis in the comprehensive assessment. The facility failed to include Resident #88's depression diagnosis in the comprehensive assessment. This failure could place residents at risk of not having their care and treatment needs assessed to ensure necessary care and services were provided. Findings included: Record review of Resident #86 face sheet dated 6/12/2024 revealed an admission date of 4/12/2024 with diagnoses of unspecified fracture of left femur (traumatic injury to femur), acute respiratory failure (when one does not receive sufficient oxygen throughout the body), schizophrenia (a mental disorder characterized by disruptions in thought process), bipolar disorder (serious mental illness that causes unusual shifts 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-14 · tag F0645 — isolated
    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 I residents with mental illness, developmental disability, or intellectual disability, were provided with a PASRR Level II assessment for 1 (Resident #86) of 3 residents reviewed. The facility failed to ensure Resident #86 received a PASRR level 2 evaluation. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving necessary mental health services to reach their highest practicable level of well-being. Finding included: Record review of Resident #86's face sheet dated 6/12/2024 revealed an admission date of 4/12/2024 with diagnoses of unspecified fracture of left femur (traumatic injury to femur), acute respiratory failure (when one does not receive sufficient oxygen throughout the body), schizophrenia (a mental disorder characterized by disruptions in thought process), and bipolar disorder (serious mental illness that causes unusual shifts in mood). Record review of Resident…

    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
Show the remaining 5 citations
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-14 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    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, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents unable to conduct activities of daily living (ADLs) received the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for three of eight residents (Resident # 20, Resident #39, and Resident #72) reviewed for quality of life. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #20 and Resident #39's nails were cleaned. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #72's nails were cleaned and did not have rough edges. These failures could place residents at risk for poor hygiene, dignity issues, and decreased quality of life. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #20's Face Sheet dated, 06/13/2024, revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of need for assistance with personal care (providing care that is related to the patient's body, appearance, hygiene, and movement), lack of coordination (uncoordinated movement due to a muscle control problem that causes an…

    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 · E2023-05-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection and prevention control program that included, at a minimum, a system for preventing and controlling infections for 6 of 10 residents reviewed for the usage of Blood Pressure Monitors (Resident #28, Resident #73, Resident #41, Resident #75, Resident #84, and Resident #198) as indicated by: The facility failed to ensure MA B, MA C and LVN A disinfected the blood pressure monitors between the residents. These failures could place the residents at risk for cross contamination and infection. Findings included: Review of Resident #28's face sheet on 05/10/23 reflected the resident was an [AGE] year-old female and was admitted to the facility on [DATE].The diagnoses included Heart failure, Hypertension (High Blood pressure) , History of Falling, Insomnia, Anemia, Major Depressive Disorder, Vitamin D Deficiency, Retention of Urine, Hyperlipidemia (Excess fat in blood), Seasonal Allergic Rhinitis(Common Allergy) , Type 2…

    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 · D2023-05-11 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor 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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to a clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, which included housekeeping and maintenance services necessary to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable interior, for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #84) reviewed for a homelike environment. The facility failed to ensure the dents and scuffs on the interior wall of Resident #84's room were repaired and painted. This failure could place residents at risk for diminished quality of life due to the lack of a well-kept environment. Findings included: Review of Resident #84's face sheet on 05/10/23 reflected the resident was an [AGE] year-old male and was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The diagnoses included Encephalopathy (damage or disease that affects the brain), Heart failure, Retention of Urine, Hyperlipidemia (too much fat in the blood), Hypertension (High Blood Pressure), Cerebral Infarction (stroke), Muscle Wasting, Lack of Coordination,…

    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 · D2023-05-11 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
    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 reviews, the facility failed to provide food that accommodates resident's preferences for one (Resident #62) of four residents reviewed for food preferences and the accommodation of resident's meal choices. The facility failed to provide Resident #62 with her food preferences with consistency, for breakfast and lunch during her entire stay at the facility from the day of admission [DATE]). Resident #64 requested not to have tomatoes, sausage, and eggs. This failure could affect the residents that are provided daily meals by the facility, by placing them at risk for adverse effect from food, frustration, not enjoying meals, and weight loss. Findings included: Review of Resident #62's face sheet on 05/10/23 reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female and was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The diagnoses included Displaced subtrochanteric fracture of right femur (fracture of the top of the thigh bone), Dementia, Psychotic Disturbance, Anxiety, Type 2 Diabetes…

    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
  • No harm found · C2023-05-11 · tag F0577 — widespread
    Allow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
    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 have the results of the most recent survey of the facility posted in a place readily available to all residents, family members, and legal representatives for the facility reviewed for residents rights. The facility failed to post the facility's most recent inspection reports. This deficient practice prevented residents from exercising their rights and placed them at risk of having no awareness of the facility's inspection history and any plans of correction the facility should have in place. Findings included: During a confidential interview on 5/10/23 at 10:40 am, 10 confidential interviewees said they were not sure if the results of the most recent survey of the facility were available to read. The confidential interviewees also said they did not know where the results of the most recent survey of the facility were posted in the facility. During an observation on 5/10/23 at 2:58 pm, postings regarding residents' rights, local ombudsman's contact information, infection preventionist contact information,…

    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
Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$11,168 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $11,168 — penalty dated 2024-06-14

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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to THE ENSIGN GROUP — 342 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 53.2-0.2 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.8+1.2 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 52.7-1.7 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.4-0.4 vs chain
The other 341 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
1 of 5Aspen Health And WellnessOverland Park, KS 1 of 5Bennett Hills Rehabilitation and Care CenterGooding, ID 1 of 5Broadway By The SeaLong Beach, CA 1 of 5Chatsworth Park Health Care CenterChatsworth, CA 1 of 5Clarion Wellness and Rehabilitation CenterClarion, IA 1 of 5Colonial Manor of RandolphRandolph, NE 1 of 5Durango Health And RehabilitationDurango, CO 1 of 5Fort Dodge Health and RehabilitationFort Dodge, IA 1 of 5Greater Southside Health and RehabilitationDes Moines, IA 1 of 5Hearthstone Health And RehabilitationSparks, NV 1 of 5Heritage Gardens Rehabilitation and HealthcareCarrollton, TX 1 of 5Hillcrest Health Care CenterHawarden, IA 1 of 5Lake Village Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterLewisville, TX 1 of 5Lakeside Rehabilitation and Care CenterCoeur d'Alene, ID 1 of 5Legend Oaks Healthcare And Rehabilitation - NorthAustin, TX 1 of 5Legend Oaks Healthcare And Rehabilitation - WaxahaWaxahachie, TX 1 of 5Legend Oaks Healthcare and Rehabilitation - Fort WKeller, TX 1 of 5Madera Post Acute CenterEl Monte, CA 1 of 5Medallion Post Acute RehabilitationColorado Springs, CO 1 of 5Mesquite Post Acute CareLubbock, TX 1 of 5Millbrook Healthcare and Rehabilitation CenterLancaster, TX 1 of 5Misty Willow Healthcare and Rehabilitation CenterHouston, TX 1 of 5New Orange HillsOrange, CA 1 of 5Northeast Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterSan Antonio, TX 1 of 5Northgate PlazaIrving, TX 1 of 5Oak View Health And RehabilitationConway, SC 1 of 5Oakwood Care And RehabilitationLakewood, CO 1 of 5Omaha Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterOmaha, NE 1 of 5Onion Creek Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterAustin, TX 1 of 5Park Manor Bee CaveBee Cave, TX 1 of 5Pelican Pointe Health And Rehabilitation CenterWindsor, CO 1 of 5Premier Care Center For Palm SpringsPalm Springs, CA 1 of 5Provo Rehabilitation and NursingProvo, UT 1 of 5Rock Canyon Respiratory And Rehabilitation CenterPueblo, CO 1 of 5Rosewood Rehabilitation CenterReno, NV 1 of 5San Marcos Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterSan Marcos, TX 1 of 5Sonterra Health CenterSan Antonio, TX 1 of 5SouthlandNorwalk, CA 1 of 5Southland Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterLufkin, TX 1 of 5Spencer Post Acute Rehabilitation CenterSpencer, IA

Showing 40 of 341; lowest-rated first.

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

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
GUADALUPE COUNTY HOSPITAL BOARDOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 08/01/2021
HURLEY, RACHAELIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2021
RATHI, ANILIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/14/2024
BURNAM, SOONIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 08/01/2021
GANN, KODYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 08/01/2021
KEETCH, CHADIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/01/2011
MUSTANG RIDGE HEALTHCARE, INC.OrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2021
CARETRUST GP LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2021
CARETRUST REIT INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2021
CTR PARTNERSHIP LPOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2021
ENSIGN SERVICES INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 06/18/2021

CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 11 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

6 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.

$10.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+7.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$908K
Related-party expense9% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 67%Medicare 11%Other / private 21%

This home reported $908K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

Cost & finances

$309per resident / day
operating cost
$9,404per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$334per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Texas
$5,627/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$7,604/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,666/mo
Assisted living

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 676459. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-24, 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.

What to do next