Twin Oaks Manor
112 Pioneer Dr, Booker, TX 79005 · Government - Hospital district · 40 certified beds · (806) 658-9786 Medicaid only — no Medicare
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0605) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (18) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (74%) 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 1 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 1 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 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 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 27.6% | 15.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 10.8% | 3.0% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 2.5% | 0.3% | 0.9% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 6.4% | 0.8% | 2.0% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 2.4% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.4% | 3.3% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 28.1% | 14.0% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 8.2% | 18.0% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.1% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.7% | 3.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 35.0% | 13.4% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 24.0% | 9.6% | 17.1% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.78 | 2.17 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.68 | 2.06 | 1.80 | typical |
* 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.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 40 beds and averages 40.4 residents a day — about 101% occupied, or roughly -0 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 5.80 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.09 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 4.23 is at or above 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 5.06 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 6.09 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.27 to 0.66 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 74% is well above the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
18 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-11 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — patternHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 1 (Resident #2) of 13 residents reviewed for resident rights. Resident #2 was observed with her catheter bag not in a privacy bag for 3 days exposing her catheter bag to an open hallway and the outside environment. This failure could place residents at risk for feeling uncomfortable and disrespected leading to isolation and deterioration in general health conditions. Findings included: Record review of Resident #2's face sheet printed 6/11/26 revealed she was an [AGE] year-old female resident admitted [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses to include chronic kidney disease (longstanding disease of the kidneys leading to kidney failure), encounter for palliative (specialized medical care focused on relieving symptoms (such as pain, nausea, or shortness of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-11 · tag F0605 — failed to not use drugs as a restraint — patternPrevent the use of unnecessary psychotropic medications or use medications that may restrain a resident's ability to function.
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 residents who use psychotropic drugs received gradual dose reductions (unless clinically contraindicated) in an effort to discontinue those drugs for 3 (Resident #1, #2, and #7) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Resident #1 was on two psychotropic medications with no attempted gradual dose reductions in the past 12 months. Resident #2 was on one psychotropic medication with no attempted gradual dose reductions in the past 12 months. Resident #7 was on two psychotropic medications with no attempted gradual dose reductions in the past 12 months and one psychotropic medication with one gradual dose reduction completed since admission 5/09/2025. This failure could affect residents resulting in excessive sedation, dizziness, blurred vision, weight gain/loss, falls, feelings of isolation, and/or increased depression.Findings included: Resident #1: Record review of Resident #1 face sheet printed 6/09/26 revealed he was a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-11 · tag F0801 — patternEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, taking into consideration resident assessments, individual plans of care and the number, acuity and diagnoses of the facility's resident population in accordance with the facility assessment requirement for 1 of 1 kitchen staff (Dietary Manager) reviewed for qualifications. The facility failed to ensure the individual functioning as the Dietary Manger possessed the appropriate certification, training, and qualifications to direct the food and nutrition services department. This failure could place residents who consume food prepared from the kitchen at increased risk of food borne illness and not receiving adequate nutrition.Findings included: Record review of ADS's undated employee file revealed she was hired into the Dietary Manager position on 08/19/25. Record review of a facility receipt dated 4/1/2026 revealed payment for the ADS's enrollment in an online Dietary Manager training…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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 the professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation. The facility failed to ensure freezer and pantry items were properly stored, labeled, and dated.This failure could place residents at risk of food-borne illnesses. Findings included:Observation of the freezer on 06/09/26 at 10:24 AM revealed the following:1. (1) bag of breaded meat, no label or date.2. (3) bags of white meat, dated, no label.3. (1) bag of meat, dated, no label.4. (6) bags of what looked like bread, dated, no label.5. (5) frozen pies in boxes, no label or date. 6. (2) opaque brown bags, dated, no label. 7. (1) bag frozen breaded vegetables, dated, no label.8. (4) packages of meat, no label or date.9. (2) packages of what looked to be hot dogs or sausages, dated, no label. Observation of the pantry on 06/09/26 at 10:27 AM revealed the following:1. (1) bag that contained what looked like cereal, dated, no label.2. (2) large clear…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-11 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person centered care plan for each resident that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment and describes the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 (Resident #1) of 13 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. -The facility failed to address the use of a catheter in Resident #1's care plans. This failure could place residents at risk for not attaining or maintaining their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being.Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet printed 6/09/2026 revealed an [AGE] year-old male resident admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-11 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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 residents who need respiratory care were provided with such care consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 (Resident #1) of 13 residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to change the oxygen hydration bottle for Resident #1 for 5 months. This failure could place resident at risk for complications such as shortness of breath, confusion, respiratory failure, infection, and exacerbation of their condition.Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet printed 6/09/26 revealed an [AGE] year-old male resident admitted [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses to include chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a group of lung diseases that block airflow and make it difficult to breath), cerebral infarction (occurs as a result of disrupted blood flow to the brain due to problems with the blood vessels that supply it), atrial fibrillation (an irregular, often rapid heart rate 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-30 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for 1 out of 1 kitchen reviewed for food safety. The facility failed to ensure foods were labeled and dated. The facility failed to ensure frozen foods were properly closed. The facility failed to ensure foods and condiments served to residents were not expired. These failures could place residents at risk of food-borne illnesses. Findings included: An initial tour of the kitchen on 04/28/2025 at 10:45AM revealed the freezer contained the following: (1) partial 1 gallon container of Neapolitan ice cream with no date opened, (1) partial 1 gallon container of Chocolate/Vanilla swirl ice cream with no date opened, (1) 11.25oz. partial box of Texas toast garlic bread with no date opened and open to air, (1) 5lb. bag of fish sticks with no date, (2) loose corn dogs in their original box, open to air, with no date opened, (1) 40oz. package of frozen mixed vegetables with no date, (1) 32lb. bag of frozen pork chops open to air, with no date,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-30 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review; the facility failed to ensure medications were stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for 1 (the medication room) of 3 medication storage areas reviewed for medication storage. The medication room refrigerator had medications that had been stored out of recommended storage temperatures. The facility's failure could result in a resident receiving a medication that would be ineffective for their treatment resulting in exacerbation of the resident's condition and disease processes. Findings included: Record review of the medication room (the facility had one medication storage room) refrigerator log for April 2025 revealed the following documented temperatures: (-per merriam-webster.com: freezing point of water is 32 degrees Fahrenheit.) 4-01-2025 - 34 degrees Fahrenheit 4-02-2024 - 34 degrees Fahrenheit 4-03-2025 - 32 degrees Fahrenheit 4-04-2024 - 32 degrees Fahrenheit 4-09-2024 - 34 degrees Fahrenheit 4-10-2024 - 32 degrees Fahrenheit 4-12-2024 - 32 degrees Fahrenheit 4-12-2024 - 34 degrees Fahrenheit…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-30 · tag F0801 — isolatedEmploy sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skill sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, taking into consideration resident assessments, individual plans of care and the number, acuity, and diagnoses of the facility's resident population in accordance with the facility assessment for 1 of 1 Dietary Manager reviewed for Dietary Manager Certification. The facility failed to ensure the Dietary Manager was certified as a Dietary Manager. This failure could place residents at risk of not having their nutritional needs met and/or a decreased quality of life. Findings included: Record review of facility staff records on 04/30/2025 at 9:41 AM, revealed the Dietary Manager's certificate expired on 08/31/2022 . An interview with the Dietary Manager on 04/30/2025 at 10:29 AM, reflected she was aware her certificate was expired. The Dietary Manager stated she needed to get registered to take the test for recertification, today . An interview with the Administrator on 04/30/2025 at 10:48…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 (CNA B) of 4 staff observed for infection control. -CNA B did not wash her hands while performing incontinent care for Resident #34. This deficient practice placed residents at risk of infections. Findings include: Record review of Resident #34's face sheet revealed she was an [AGE] year-old female resident admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include dementia (a group of thinking and social symptoms that interferes with daily functioning), fracture of the greater trochanter of right femur (right hip), macular degeneration (a degenerative condition affecting the central part of the retina), and hallucinations (sensory experiences that occur in the absence of an external stimulus). 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.
Show the remaining 8 citations
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-03-14 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation. The facility failed to ensure stored food was properly labeled and dated. This failure could put place Residents at risk for foodborne illness. Findings Included: Observation of refrigerator one on 3/12/ 24 at 10:58 am revealed 1 container of launchable for staff with no label or date. Observation of refrigerator one on 3/12/24 at 11:08 am revealed 1 tray of individual boxes of vanilla shake milk with no label or date. Observation of refrigerator one on 3/12/24 at 11:08 am revealed 1 bag of parsley with no label or date. Observation of freezer two on 3/12 at 11:15 am revealed 3 packages of ground beef with no date. Observation of freezer three on 3/12/24 at 11:15 am revealed 1 container of chocolate ice cream with no date. Observation of refrigerator two on 3/12/24 at 11:15 am revealed 1 bag of sliced oranges with no label or date. Observation of refrigerator two…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-03-14 · tag F0700 — patternTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
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 attempt to use appropriate alternatives prior to installing a side or bed rail for 3 (Resident #8, Resident #16, and Resident #17) and failed to obtain informed consent prior to installation of bedrails for 1 (Resident #31) of 12 residents reviewed for bedrails. 1. Resident #8 had a bedrail on her bed which was placed there on her admission to the facility without prior attempts at appropriate alternatives. 2. Resident #16 had a bedrail on his bed which was placed there on his admission to the facility without prior attempts at appropriate alternatives. 3. Resident #17 had a bedrail on her bed which was placed there on her admission to the facility without prior attempts at appropriate alternatives. 4. Resident #31 had bedrails on his bed despite a consent for bedrails in his paper chart that indicated they were not being used. These failures could place residents in danger of entrapment or injury. Findings Included: 1. Record review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-14 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 comprehensive assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 (Resident #14) of 12 residents reviewed for accuracy of assessment. Resident #14 was coded as having a diagnosis of cerebral palsy (group of disorders that affect a person's ability to move and maintain balance and posture), when he did not, in fact, have cerebral palsy. This failure could lead to residents receiving unnecessary care. Findings Included: Record review of Resident #14's admission record dated 03/03/22 revealed a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to major depressive disorder (a mental disorder characterized by persistent low mood, low self-esteem, and loss of interest or pleasure in normally enjoyable activities), generalized anxiety disorder (inability to control constant worrying), muscle spasm (when a muscle involuntarily and forcibly contracts), myopia (near sighted),…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-14 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident consistent with resident rights and that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 2 (Resident #8 and Resident #14) of 12 residents reviewed for comprehensive person-centered care plans. 1. Resident #8 had a bedrail installed on her bed, but her care plan did not address use of bedrails. 2. Resident #14 was care planned to have supervision during smoking and to have staff keep his cigarettes and lighter, but he was allowed to smoke unsupervised and to have his cigarettes and lighter in his possession. These failures could lead to residents being injured due to not receiving needed care and/or supervision. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #8's admission record dated 10/04/23 revealed a [AGE] year-old female…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-14 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure that the resident environment remains as free of accident hazards as is possible and each resident receives adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 2 (Resident #14 and Resident #31) of 12 residents reviewed for accidents and hazards. Resident #14 was allowed to keep his lighter and cigarettes in his room and on his person and to smoke unsupervised. Resident #31 was allowed to keep his lighter and cigarettes in his room and he smoked in his room on at least one occasion. These failures could lead to residents being burned or starting a fire in the facility. Findings Included: 1. Record review of Resident #14's admission record dated 03/03/22 revealed a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included but were not limited to major depressive disorder (a mental disorder characterized by persistent low mood, low self-esteem, and loss of interest or pleasure in normally…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-14 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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 PRN orders for psychotropic drugs are limited to 14 days for 1 (Resident #31) of 12 residents reviewed for PRN orders for psychotropic drugs. Resident #31 had an order for a PRN antianxiety medication with a start date of 11/12/23. This failure could place residents at risk of being overmedicated or receiving unnecessary medications. Findings Included: Record review of Resident #31's admission record dated 11/24/23 revealed a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included, but were not limited to, centrilobular emphysema (long-term, progressive lung disease), alcoholic cirrhosis of liver (impaired liver function caused by the formation of scar tissue), anxiety disorder (mental disorder characterized by significant and uncontrollable feelings of anxiety and fear), weakness, and malignant neoplasm of esophagus (cancer of the esophagus). Record review of Resident #31's quarterly MDS with a completion date of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review it was determined the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were stored and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles and include the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions, and the expiration date when applicable on 2 of 3 Medication Carts (Medication Cart #1 and Medication Cart #2) observed. 4 opened bottles of medications without open dates and 1 expired medication found on A-Hall Medication Cart #1. 5 opened bottles of medications without open dates and 2 expired medications found on B and D Halls Medication Cart #2. The facility's failure could result in residents not receiving an accurate dose of medication as well as not being maintained at their best therapeutic level. Findings include: Observation on 3/12/24 at10:48AM of A-Hall Medication Cart #1 with MA D revealed multidose bottles, one bottle of each medication; Pepcid, Senna Plus, Simethicone, and [NAME]-Vision without open dates. Expired 1 bottle of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-12-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection 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 6 of 33 residents observed for sanitation and COVID protocols. The facility did not follow infection control policies related to hand hygiene and source control for COVID- 19 transmission-based precautions for residents that were COVID- 19 positive. This failure could place residents at risk for infections, contamination, physical decline, and mental decline. Findings included: An interview on 12/11/23 at 12:17 PM, ADM revealed 7 residents are currently COVID-19 positive and all staff are to wear masks. An observation on 12/11/23 at 11:57 AM revealed DA C not wearing a mask at serving window in dining room. At 11:59 AM, observed DC C staff putting on a mask. An observation on 12/11/23 at 12:47 PM revealed Resident #4 with a blue gown hanging outside resident's door with gloves, masks, sanitizer,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
What families pay in TX
CMS lists this home as Medicaid-certified only — it can accept Medicaid for long-term care, but it is not Medicare-certified, so Medicare will not pay for a short rehabilitation (“skilled nursing”) stay here. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Texas Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 45F197. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-06-11, 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.