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

Bertram Nursing And Rehabilitation

540 E State Hwy 29, Bertram, TX 78605 · For profit - Corporation · 74 certified beds · (512) 355-2116 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited May 20241 immediate-jeopardy citation$10,135 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
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited May 2024
  • inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
  • the CMS record shows $10,135 in federal fines (most recent 2023-10-05)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (96%) runs well above the national median (45%)

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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 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 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
200 County Road 340 #A · (512) 715-3110 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
105 S Boundary St · (512) 715-0701 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
145 E Vaughan St · (512) 355-3155 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Bertram City Park · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
430 W State Highway 29 · (512) 355-8111

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 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 increased16.1%15.8%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight0.0%3.0%5.4%check this — see note marked star below the table
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 infection0.0%0.8%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%2.4%6.5%check this — see note marked star 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 injury1.8%3.3%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened14.7%14.0%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication20.9%18.0%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.0%3.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control10.3%13.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table8.3%9.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.5%1.4%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days0.322.171.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.542.061.80better

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

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.

10.1%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
0.25U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.12hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.12hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
<0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.25 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 33% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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 SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.1%CMS range 6.1–15.410.7%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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identifiednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF staynot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsenednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.971.02Oct 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

0.47
RN hours/ resident / day
0.61
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.66
Aide hours/ resident / day
2.73
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.22
RN hoursweekends
95.6%
Total nursing turnover
100.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 74 beds and averages 47.5 residents a day — about 64% occupied, or roughly 26 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 2.73 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.47 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.66 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 2.21 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.95 on weekdays — 25% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.57 to 0.22 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 96% is well above 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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-11-26)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-29)

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.

13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2023-10-05 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents had the right to be free from abuse for one (Resident #2) out of three residents reviewed for abuse, in that: The facility failed to prevent a physical altercation between Resident #1 and Resident #2 that led to Resident #2 sustaining a head injury, subdural hematoma (brain bleed), and subsequent death. This failure resulted in an identification of an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on 10/04/23 at 12:57 PM. While the IJ was removed on 10/05/23 at 11:40 AM, the facility remained at a level of actual harm at a scope of isolated that was not immediate jeopardy due to the facility's need to evaluate the effectiveness of the corrective systems. This failure placed residents at risk pain, injury, hospitalization, and death. 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 altered mental status, unsteadiness on feet,…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2024-05-06 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    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 residents were free from neglect. The facility failed to seek medical attention for Resident #1 who had fallen and complained of pain in her right shoulder. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated April 18, 2024, revealed Resident #1 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1's diagnoses included primary degenerative joint disease, constipation, protein-calorie malnutrition, muscle weakness, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, chronic pain syndrome, glaucoma, high blood pressure, congestive heart failure, chronic lung disease, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, age related osteoporosis without current pathological fracture, convulsions, pneumonia, insomnia, injury of muscle(s) and tendon(s) of the rotator cuff of right should initial encounter, presence of right artificial shoulder joint, femur (bone of upper thigh) fracture.…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-01-28 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, medical records were maintained on each resident that were complete, accurately documented, readily accessible, and systematically organized for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for resident records. The facility failed to ensure physician orders for Resident #1's X-ray were entered on the porta on 01-16-2026. This failure could place residents at risk for incorrect treatment decisions, evaluation, and treatment plans compromising patient safety due to insufficient information records.Findings Included:Record review of Resident #1's admission record, dated 01-28-2026, revealed a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included Dementia (Condition which involves memory loss, affecting thinking, and social abilities which interfere with their daily lives) and, Repeated Falls and Depression (a mood disorder that causes 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-11-26 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation. 1. The facility failed to ensure stored foods in 1 of 1 walk in refrigerator (raw chicken) and 1 of 1 bread/misc . items tray rack (4 large, opened chip bags) were labeled and dated. 2. The facility failed to ensure 1 of 1 reach-in refrigerator was maintained in sanitary condition. 3. The facility failed to ensure dented cans were removed and kept separately in a designated area. 4. The facility failed to ensure dietary staff used a beard guard when preparing and plating resident foods. 5. The facility failed to ensure expired items were removed from storage and discarded. These failures could place residents at risk for food borne illness and cross-contamination.The findings include: During an initial tour on 09/23/25 beginning at 09:03 AM of the one and only kitchen revealed:- 1 of 1 walk-in refrigerator contained a stainless steel straight-sided steam…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-11-26 · 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 observations, interviews and record review the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 4 of 7 residents (Resident #7, Resident #23, Resident #18, and Resident 11) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to follow hand hygiene procedure during direct care for Resident #7, Resident #18, and Resident #23.2. The facility failed to post a sign on Resident #11's door to inform nursing staff about Enhanced Barrier Precautions with readily available personal protective supplies before wound care provided. These failures could place residents at risk for infection transmission, sepsis, and hospitalization.Findings include:1.Record review of Resident #18's face sheet, dated 09/24/2025, reflected an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included…

    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 · E2024-08-29 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — pattern
    Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure resident rights for personal privacy for 4 of 7 residents (Resident #19, Resident #35, Resident #45, and Resident #41) reviewed for personal privacy. The facility failed to knock on Resident #19, #35, #45 and #41's room when going into the residents' rooms. This failure could affect all residents right to privacy in the facility and cause the resident to feel like their privacy was being invaded or the facility was not their home. Findings included: Review of Resident #19's Face Sheet dated 08/29/2024 revealed he was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #19's diagnoses included metabolic encephalopathy (change to how the brain works ), enterococcus (difficult to treat infection), anemia (not enough healthy red blood cells), thrombocytopenia (abnormally low level of platelets), hypoglycemia (low blood sugar), protein-calorie malnutrition, vitamin D deficiency, hypo-osmolality and hyponatremia…

    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 · Ecited before2024-08-29 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for one of one kitchen and one of one nourishment room reviewed for sanitation. 1. The facility failed to ensure Dietary Staff F wore a beard restraint and hair restraint properly while in the kitchen. 2. The facility failed to properly store closed and dated food in the refrigerator. 3. The facility failed to ensure the Nourishment Room was properly cleaned, ice was stored properly, and items were correctly labeled and dated. 4. The facility failed to ensure Dietary [NAME] E properly sanitized her hands between tasks. 5. The facility failed to ensure Dietary [NAME] E referenced recipes while preparing foods. These failures could place residents who were served from the kitchen at risk for health complications and foodborne illnesses, and decreased quality of life. Findings included: Observation in the kitchen on 08/27/24 between 09:32 AM -10:15 AM revealed dietary staff F was standing by the…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-29 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #33) reviewed for bed positioning. The facility failed to ensure Resident #33's bed was in the lowest position for fall prevention per facility policy and procedure. This failure could place residents at risk of falls, injuries, pain, and hospitalization. Findings included: Record review of an undated Face Sheet for Resident #33 reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Paraplegia (paralysis that affects the legs but not arms), and lack of coordination. Record review of the Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] for Resident #33 reflected he had a BIMS score of 15 indicating intact cognitive status. Record review of the Care Plan for Resident #33 dated 11/30/2023 and revised on 03/06/2024 reflected he was at risk for falls related to paraplegic status. An actual fall was noted.…

    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 · D2024-08-29 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that pain management was provided to residents who required such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #18) reviewed for pain management. The facility failed to ensure Resident #18 received her 06:00 -10:00 AM daily scheduled Lidocaine Patch 5% for pain on 08/27/2024. This failure placed the resident at risk of increased pain and decreased quality of life. Findings included: Review of the undated Face Sheet for Resident #18 reflected she was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of pain in right shoulder and pain in unspecified joint. Review of the Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #18 reflected a BIMS score of 4, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Section I - Active Diagnoses reflected Resident #18 had pain 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-10-19 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices for 2 of 4 residents (Residents #1 and 2) reviewed for skin integrity. Protective sleeves were ordered for Residents #1 and #2 after they each sustained skin tears but not applied. This failure placed residents at risk of further skin injury. Findings included: Review of the undated face sheet for Resident #1 reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis dementia, rash and other non-specific skin eruption, anxiety disorder, and impulse disorder. Review of the quarterly MDS assessment for Resident #1 dated 08/24/23 reflected she could not participate in the assessment. It also reflected she required the extensive assistance of two + people for the activity of dressing. Review of the care plan for Resident #1 dated 06/05/23…

    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 · E2023-07-07 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for six of six residents (Residents #28, 15, 6, 11, 42, and 25) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility failed to include activities and activity preferences in the care plans for Residents #28, 15, 6, 11, 42, and 25. This failure placed residents at risk of boredom, depression, and not attaining/maintaining the highest practicable psychosocial well-being. Findings included: Review of the undated face sheet for Resident #28 reflected an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease and major depressive disorder. Review of the annual MDS assessment for Resident #28 dated 10/13/22 reflected a BIMS score of 14 indicating intact…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-07-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for one of 24 residents (Resident #25) reviewed for infection control. Specifically, the facility failed to ensure staff were following hand hygiene procedures when involved in direct resident contact providing peri-care for Resident #25; specifically, hand hygiene with glove change was not conducted when performing peri-care when going from dirty to clean. This failure could place all residents at risk of developing communicable diseases and infections. The findings included: Review of Resident #25's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed a diagnosis of Diabetes Mellitus Type 2, End Stage Renal Disease, and Hemodialysis. Observation conducted on 07/06/23 at 09:16 AM of mechcanical lift transfer and peri-care for Resident #25. CNA C…

    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 · D2023-07-07 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolated
    Keep all essential equipment working safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure all mechanical, electrical, and patient care equipment was in safe operating condition for one of eight residents (Resident #38) reviewed for safe operating patient care equipment. Resident #38's electric bed remote was not maintained in safe operating condition according to manufacturer's recommendations, and more specifically Resident #38's electric bed remote cord had cracked casing and exposed wiring. This failure could put all residents in the facility at risk of injury or electric shock. The findings included: Interview conducted on 07/05/23 at 10:52 AM with Resident #38 revealed she was receiving good care in the facility. Resident #38 stated she was concerned about her bed remote cord exposed wire. Observation conducted on 07/05/23 at 10:55 AM revealed Resident #38 sitting up in wheelchair in her room near her electric bed. The electric bed remote was on the floor between bed and window, and the casing on the cord was cracked with wiring exposed. Resident #38 stated she was unsure…

    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

“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.

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

$10,135 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $10,135 — penalty dated 2023-10-05

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 CREATIVE SOLUTIONS IN HEALTHCARE — 149 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 4 of 52.1+1.9 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.7+1.3 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 51.1-0.1 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 53.2+1.8 vs chain
The other 148 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.1★, per CMS)
1 of 5Afton Oaks Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterHouston, TX 1 of 5Arlington Heights Health and Rehabilitation CenterFort Worth, TX 1 of 5Beltline Healthcare CenterGarland, TX 1 of 5Bluebonnet Nursing & RehabilitationKarnes City, TX 1 of 5Bluebonnet Point WellnessBullard, TX 1 of 5Brentwood Terrace Healthcare And RehabilitationParis, TX 1 of 5Buena Vida Nursing and Rehab-San AntonioSan Antonio, TX 1 of 5Cottonwood Nursing & RehabilitationDenton, TX 1 of 5Countryview Nursing & RehabilitationTerrell, TX 1 of 5Dogwood Trails ManorWoodville, TX 1 of 5Downtown Health and Rehabilitation CenterFort Worth, TX 1 of 5Estates Healthcare and Rehabilitation CenterFort Worth, TX 1 of 5Fair Park Health & Rehabilitation CenterDallas, TX 1 of 5Five Points Nursing & Rehabilitation of College StCollege Station, TX 1 of 5Five Points at Lake Highlands Nursing and RehabDallas, TX 1 of 5Five Points of PflugervillePflugerville, TX 1 of 5Franklin Heights Nursing & RehabilitationEl Paso, TX 1 of 5Gilmer Nursing & RehabilitationGilmer, TX 1 of 5Grace Pointe Wellness CenterEl Paso, TX 1 of 5Graham Oaks Care CenterGraham, TX 1 of 5Granbury Care CenterGranbury, TX 1 of 5Greenhill VillasMount Pleasant, TX 1 of 5Heritage At Longview Healthcare CenterLongview, TX 1 of 5Huebner Creek Health & Rehabilitation CenterSan Antonio, TX 1 of 5Interlochen Health and Rehabilitation CenterArlington, TX 1 of 5Kenedy Health & RehabilitationKenedy, TX 1 of 5Kennedy Health & RehabLufkin, TX 1 of 5Lake Lodge Nursing & RehabilitationLake Worth, TX 1 of 5Lampstand Nursing and RehabilitationBryan, TX 1 of 5Lancaster Nursing & RehabilitationLancaster, TX 1 of 5Marine Creek Nursing & RehabilitationFort Worth, TX 1 of 5Mesa Vista Inn Health CenterSan Antonio, TX 1 of 5Mountain View Health & RehabilitationEl Paso, TX 1 of 5Navasota Nursing & RehabilitationNavasota, TX 1 of 5Normandy Terrace Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterSan Antonio, TX 1 of 5North Pointe Nursing and RehabilitationWatauga, TX 1 of 5Park Place Care CenterGeorgetown, TX 1 of 5Parkview Manor Nursing and RehabilitationWeimar, TX 1 of 5Peach Tree PlaceWeatherford, TX 1 of 5Pebble Creek Nursing CenterEl Paso, TX

Showing 40 of 148; 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 / managerTypeRoleSince
BOWERS, SEANIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 07/01/2024
CISNEROS, ALFREDIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 02/18/2008
COBB, TRAVISIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 10/05/2022
COOPER, STEPHENIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 11/11/2022
HARDIN, SHERRIEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 09/04/2024
KERZEE, RICHARDIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 09/24/2007
KORENEK, PATRICIAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/05/2018
SOECHTING, PAULIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 11/22/2024
STRACK, JOEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 02/11/2022
HUGGINS, LINDAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 09/01/2022
WILLIG, ZACHARYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2025
THOMPSON, JOHNNYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2024
BERTRAM I ENTERPRISES, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2022
BLAKE, GARYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/01/2022
BLAKE, MALISAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/01/2022
BAKER, DENNISIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 02/06/2025
SYED, ASIFIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 04/09/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 18 rows in the source record cover these 17 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.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$3.2M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-23.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 66%Medicare 4%Other / private 30%

A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

$236per resident / day
operating cost
$7,170per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$191per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

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 676117. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-11-26, 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