Forum Parkway Health & Rehabilitation

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

59.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 235 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 56.2% 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 64 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 67% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 139 beds and averages 95.3 residents a day — about 69% occupied, or roughly 44 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 3.71 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.71 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.22 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 3.42 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.83 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.69 to 0.76 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 49% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

24 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 13 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · K2024-09-19 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — pattern
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  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 a resident receives care, consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent pressure ulcers and does not develop pressure ulcers unless the individual's clinical condition demonstrates that they were unavoidable for 1 of 2 residents (Resident # 1) reviewed for quality of care. The facility did not prevent the development of one facility-acquired Stage IV pressure injury on the right calf for Resident #1. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified on 09/18/2024. The IJ Template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 12:55PM. While the IJ was removed on 09/19/2024, the facility remained out of compliance at a severity level of no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is not Immediate Threat and a scope of Isolated due to the need for monitoring of corrective measures and the effectiveness of its corrective plan. This failure could place residents at risk for worsening of an ulcer, infection, and 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-02 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide the necessary services for residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for 1 (Resident#1) of 4 residents reviewed for ADLs. The facility failed to ensure Resident#1 had her fingernails cleaned and trimmed on 06/02/26. This failure could place residents at risk for loss of dignity, risk for infections, and a decreased quality of life. A record review of Resident #1's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #1 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with the diagnosis of: type 2 diabetes mellitus (elevated blood sugar), non-Alzheimer's dementia (brain disorders causing cognitive decline due to factors other than Alzheimer's), and stroke. Resident #1's BIMS score was 3/15 indicating severe cognitive impairment. The review further reflected the resident received partial/maximal assistance with ADL'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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-19 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolated
  Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range and electrolyte balance, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrates that this is not possible or resident preferences indicate otherwise for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #73) reviewed for nutritional status. The facility failed to recognize, evaluate, and address timely interventions for Resident #73 when the Dietitian made the recommendation for it on 01/02/26. Resident #73 experienced weight loss of 7.07% (7.4 pounds) from 12/24/25 to 03/01/26. This failure could place residents at risk for improper care, weight loss, malnutrition, and overall health decline. Findings included: Review of Resident #73's admission MDS Assessment, dated 12/29/25, reflected she was an [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. She had a BIMS score of 03 indicating she had severe cognitive impairment. Her active…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-19 · 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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assured the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for 2 of 5 residents (Residents #2 and #31) reviewed for pharmacy services.1. LVN J failed to administer a Potassium Chloride Extended-Release tablet in the proper form, when she crushed the tablet, before administering it to Resident #2 through the resident's enteral feeding tube. 2. RN H failed to ensure Resident #31 received his morning dose of sodium chloride 1 gram when RN H prepared the medication and left it on the 100-hall medication cart. RN H did not return to administer the medication to Resident #31 when he came back to the room.These failures could place residents at risk for ineffective drug therapy and medication error.Findings included:1. Record review of Resident #2's admission MDS dated [DATE] reflected the resident was a [AGE]…

  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 · Dcited before2025-11-19 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preference for 1 (Resident #2) of 1 resident reviewed for food preferences. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 was given a substitute food item. This failure could place residents at risk of not eating their meals, further resulting in weight loss, and poor quality of life.Findings included:Record review of Resident #2's face sheet, dated 09/23/2025, revealed a [AGE] year old female, admitted on [DATE] with primary diagnosis of chronic diastolic (congestive) heart failure and other diagnoses included history of transient ischemic attack (episode of stroke like symptoms) and cerebral infarction (stroke), spondylosis (degenerative change in the spine), gastro-esophageal reflux disease (chronic condition where stomach acid flows back into the esophagus), hypertension (high blood pressure), mild neurocognitive disorder (cognitive decline), hyperlipidemia (high levels…

  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 · Dcited before2025-07-29 · 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 observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received food that accommodate the allergies, intolerances, and preferences of 2 (Resident #1 and Resident #2) of 5 residents reviewed for food and nutrition services. 1. On 07/25/25 during dinner, the facility failed to accommodate the preference of Resident #1 when she was served a pork hotdog that caused her to become nauseous and vomit. 2. On 07/29/25 during lunch, the facility failed to accommodate the preference of Resident #2 when he was served beef tacos. The failure could affect residents who consumed food from the facility's kitchen by placing them at risk for allergic reactions, dissatisfaction, poor intake, weight loss, and decline in health. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 07/29/25, reflected the resident was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1's diagnoses included Syncope and Collapse (loss of consciousness and posture), 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
• Potential for harm · E2025-01-13 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #47) reviewed for oxygen. The facility failed to have accurate physician orders for oxygen use for Resident #47. This failure could place residents who received oxygen therapy at risk for inadequate or inappropriate amounts of oxygen delivery and possible infection. Findings included: Record review of Resident #47's admission Record dated 01/08/25 reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #47's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], reflected a BIMS score of 15, indicating cognition was intact. The resident's diagnosis included: stroke (poor blood flow to a part of the brain causing cell death), cancer (group of diseases involving abnormal cell growth that can spread to other parts of the body),…

  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 · E2025-01-13 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — pattern
  Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
  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 that residents who required dialysis received such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #48) reviewed for dialysis. The facility failed to ensure dialysis communication forms were completed for Resident #48 before going for dialysis and after returning from dialysis treatment. This failure could place residents at risk of inadequate communication between the facility and dialysis center. Findings included: Record review of Resident #48's admission MDS assessment, dated 11/25/24, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #48 had a diagnosis of chronic kidney disease (a chronic condition that occurs when the kidneys can no longer filter waste from the blood and requires long-term dialysis or a kidney transplant to maintain life). She had a BIMS…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-01-13 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — pattern
  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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to monitor and verify that the feeding tube is in the right location (e.g., stomach or small intestine, depending on the tube) before administering medications to prevent complications for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #92) reviewed for feeding tubes and for 1 of 2 refrigerators and 2 of 2 medication rooms reviewed for pharmacy procedures. 1. The facility failed to ensure LVN J checked for residual (the amount of liquid remaining in the stomach after an enteral feeding) before administering medication to Resident #92. This failure could place residents at risk for adverse effects due to inappropriate management of g-tube care. 2. The facility failed to ensure expired medications, 2 bottles of aspirin 325 mg with expiration dates of April 2024 and December 2024, 3 acetaminophen suppositories 650 mg with expiration dates of November 2024 and 2 acetaminophen suppositories with expiration dates of July 2024 were removed and destroyed. This failure…

  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 · E2025-01-13 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — pattern
  Ensure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident's drug regimen was free of unnecessary medication for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #89) reviewed for adequate monitoring of unnecessary medication. The facility did not monitor Resident #89 for side-effects related to the use of the anti-anxiety medication Buspirone, hypnotic medication Zolpidem Tartrate, and the anti-psychotic medication Ingrezza. This failure could place the residents at risk for adverse consequences of medication. Findings included: Record review of Resident #89's admission record, dated 01/08/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #89's quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 12/09/24, reflected she had a BIMS score of 11, indicating mild cognitive impairment. Further review revealed she had active diagnoses of progressive neurological conditions (conditions characterized by gradual…

  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 · Ecited before2025-01-13 · 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 prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 2 of 10 residents (Residents #7 and #9) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA M used Personal Protection Equipment during urinary catheter care performed for Resident #7 while on EBP precautions. 2. The facility failed to ensure RN C used Personal Protection Equipment during medication pass and providing care for Resident #9's tube feeding cite while on EBP precautions. These failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination and the spread of infection. Findings included: Record review of Resident #7's face sheet dated 01/08/25 reflected Resident #7 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #7's quarterly MDS…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

$19,083 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $19,083 — penalty dated 2024-09-19

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 HMG HEALTHCARE — 31 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 33 rows in the source record cover these 19 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

4 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.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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, FY2024). 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