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

Brownwood Nursing & Rehabilitation

101 Miller Dr, Brownwood, TX 76801 · For profit - Corporation · 128 certified beds · (325) 643-9555 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (325) 643-9555 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 14 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

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)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (97%) 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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
1/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
125 S Park Dr Ste H · (325) 646-0400 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
3800 Highway 377 S · (325) 643-3800 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
2800 4th St · (325) 646-6935 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Burnett Rd · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 2 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating3★
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 increased11.4%15.8%15.4%better
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 symptoms4.3%2.4%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury7.4%3.3%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened3.4%14.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication15.0%18.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.7%3.8%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control4.3%13.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table13.0%9.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.1%1.5%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%88.0%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission26.4%25.7%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit20.7%12.3%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.262.171.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.722.061.80typical

* 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.

50.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 75 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

50.6%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.9%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
64.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.37U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.13hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.17hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.08hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 64.6% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 48 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.37 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 63% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 1% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 SNF50.6%CMS range 38.5–61.551.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.9%CMS range 6.3–13.710.7%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 discharge64.6%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge64.6%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge47.9%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified87.8%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge97.1%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay1.1%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened2.2%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization8.6%CMS range 5.1–13.97.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.401.02Oct 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

0.49
RN hours/ resident / day
0.81
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.49
Aide hours/ resident / day
2.79
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.34
RN hoursweekends
96.9%
Total nursing turnover
100.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 128 beds and averages 68.2 residents a day — about 53% occupied, or roughly 60 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 2.79 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.49 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.49 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 2.24 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.01 on weekdays — 25% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.55 to 0.34 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 97% 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

6
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-04-15)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2025-02-13)

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.

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · E2026-04-15 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
    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 the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as was possible and each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for of 3 residents 18 (Resident #13, Resident #1, and Resident #25) reviewed for accidents. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #13 wore a smoking apron when smoking as per her safe smoking assessment. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 had a safe smoking assessment completed prior to allowing him to smoke.3. The facility failed to ensure Resident#25 had a safe smoking assessment completed prior to allowing him to smoke. These failures could place residents at risk of injury and serious bodily harm.Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #13's electronic face sheet, accessed on 04/15/2026, revealed a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included: Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar Disorder, and…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2026-04-15 · 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 reviews, 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 of 5 (LVN D) staff and 2 of 18 (Resident #22 and Resident #64) reviewed for infection control procedures.The facility failed to ensure LVN D followed EBP while managing Resident #68's central line (a long, flexible catheter inserted into a large vein near the heart to deliver medications, fluids, or monitor blood flow over an extended period) on 4/13/26. The facility failed to ensure LVN D followed EBP while managing a Resident #58's G-tube (medical device inserted through the abdomen directly into the stomach) on 04/14/2026.The facility failed to ensure staff were notified of EBP for Resident #22 and Resident #64.The facility failed to have a PPE readily accessible to staff outside or inside of Resident #22's and 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-15 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, staff, and the public on 1 of 64 resident rooms (room [ROOM NUMBER]) reviewed for environmental concerns.The facility failed to have hot water functioning in room [ROOM NUMBER]'s sink on 04/13/2026, 04/14/2026, and 04/15/2026.This failure could place residents and staff at risk of being uncomfortable and for infections from living in an environment that does not function.Findings included:Resident #9Record review of Resident #9's electronic face sheet, dated 04/15/2026, reflected an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis including Alzheimer's disease (a type of dementia with problems including memory, thinking, and reasoning that interfere with daily life) and dementia (loss of memory, thinking, and reasoning skills). Record review of Resident #9's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 02/11/2026, reflected that she had a BIMS score of 06…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-15 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs) to meet the needs for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #29) reviewed for pharmaceutical services, in that: LVN D failed to reorder Latanoprost Ophthalmic Emulsion (0.005 % (Latanoprost) Resident #29 before his supply was depleted. This failure could place residents at risk for a decline in health and of not receiving the intended therapeutic benefit of the medications. The findings included:Record review of Resident #29's face sheet not dated, revealed a [AGE] year-old male initially admitted on [DATE] with the diagnosis of Glaucoma ( a condition in which the optic nerve becomes damaged by high fluid pressure in the eye leading to irreversible vision loss or blindness if untreated). Record review of Resident #29's admission MDS dated [DATE] revealed Section-C Cognitive Patterns Resident #29 had a BIMS…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-15 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure 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 observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored in locked compartments and permitted only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for 1 of 18 (Resident # 68) residents reviewed for storage of drugs and biologicals. The facility failed to ensure Resident #68's medication was locked when unattended by authorized personnel. This failure could place residents at risk of having access to unauthorized medications, leading to possible harm or drug diversions. Findings included: Resident #68Record review of Resident #68's electronic face sheet, dated 04/15/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis including osteomyelitis of the left ankle (infection of the bone). Record review of Resident #68's admission MDS assessment, dated 04/02/2026, reflected a BIMS score of 12 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Further review reflected he was taking high-risk medication…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-03-16 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment 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 5 of 5 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, and Resident #5) residents reviewed for comprehensive person-centered care plans.1. The facility failed to develop a care plan based on assessed needs with measurable objectives in the areas of Hypertension, adverse medication effects, altered cardiac problems, and Intravertebral disc disorder/Stenosis for Resident #1.2. The facility failed to develop a care plan based on assessed needs with measured objectives in the areas of Anticoagulant…

    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 · Ecited before2025-02-13 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to properly store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed, in that:. 1. Foods were not sealed and/or labeled properly in the facilities refrigerators (#1 and #2) and freezers (#2 and #3). 2. Ready to use clean utensils and napkins were placed and stored in uncleaned utensil holder. 3. Ready to use clean dishes, placed on and stored on top of uncleaned trays. 4. Cooking stove spill slats uncleaned with food particles and grease buildup. These failures could place residents that eat out of the kitchen at risk for contamination and food borne illnesses. Findings included: During an observation on 02/11/2025 beginning at 8:00 AM the facility kitchen revealed: Pantry 2 bags of opened tortillas in a sealed bag undated or labeled. 1 bag of opened loaf of bread with no opened date. 2 bags of cereal in clear plastic bags with no received date. Refrigerator #1…

    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 · D2025-02-13 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents who needed respiratory care were provided respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 25 residents (Resident #215) reviewed for oxygen administration. The facility failed to ensure an Oxygen in Use sign was posted on the outside of Resident #215's door. These deficient practices could place residents who received oxygen and treatments at risk of respiratory infection. The findings include: Record review of Resident # 215's face sheet dated 02/13/2025 revealed a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and shortness of breath. Record review of Resident #215's Entry MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed: Section C (Cognitive Patterns) BIMS score had not been completed. Record review of Resident #215's Physician Orders revealed a start date of 02/07/2025 May use oxygen at 2-3 liters/minute via nasal…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-13 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure 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 all drugs and biologicals were stored in permanently affixed compartments during medication storage inspection for 1 (cart #1) of 3 medication carts reviewed for storage in that: The facility failed to ensure medication cart #1 was locked and secured while unattended. This failure could result in a drug diversion. The findings include: During an observation and interview on 02/13/2025 at 1:55 PM, the medication cart was unattended at the nursing station with the drawers facing out, the button that locks the cart was not pushed in and the drawers opened when they were pulled. There was a resident standing within arm's reach of the medication cart. RN A was seen coming down the hall at 2:00 pm. RN A stated she had gotten distracted because therapy had asked her to do something. During an interview on 02/13/2025 at 02:15 PM, RN A stated the medication cart should not be left unlocked and unattended at any time. RN A stated she got called away to give a resident in physical therapy a medication and just…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-01-25 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a person-centered, comprehensive care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet residents medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs for 6 (Resident # 1, Resident #33, Resident #37, Resident #44, Resident #46, and Resident #51) of 6 residents reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to specify measurable objectives that could be evaluated or quantified for Resident #1, Resident #33, Resident #37, Resident #44, Resident #46, and Resident #51. The facility failed to specify measurable objectives that could be evaluated or quantified with a timeframe to achieve for Resident #1, Resident #44, and Resident #46. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving timely interventions or interventions not individualized to meet their specific physical, mental, and/or emotional needs. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's electronic face sheet revealed a [AGE]…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-01-25 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — pattern
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to act upon the recommendations of the pharmacist report of irregularities for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #44) reviewed for (DRR) Drug Regimen Review. The facility failed to timely follow up on Resident #44's medication regimen review which had pharmacy recommendations. This failure could place residents at risk for receiving unnecessary medications at the most effective dosage. The findings included: Resident #44 Record review of Resident #44's electronic face sheet revealed an [AGE] year-old female, admitted on [DATE] with medical diagnoses of dementia, kidney stones, high blood pressure, arthritis, knee pain, and anxiety. Record review of Resident #44's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE], Section C 0500 BIMS Score Summary revealed the resident scored 11 out of 15 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Record review of Resident #44's physician orders on 01/25/2024 revealed mirtazapine oral tablet 30mg give 1 tabled by mouth at bedtime for insomnia. Record…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-01-25 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — pattern
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    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 menu was followed for 6 of 6 (Resident # 6, #4, #8, #42, #17 and #41) residents who received a pureed meal reviewed during the lunch meal. The facility failed to ensure Residents recieving a puree texture diet were provided the food according to the menu, incuding potato salad and a roll. This failure could place residents that eat out of the kitchen at risk of poor intake, chemical imbalance and/or weight loss. Findings included: Record review of Resident #6's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed: Section A- Identification Information Resident #6 was an [AGE] year old male admitted on [DATE]; Section C- Cognitive Patterns Resident #6 had a BIMS of 12 (moderate cognitive impairment); Section K- Swallowing/Nutritional Status Resident #6 had a mechanically altered diet. Record review of facility documents, titled, Resident Roster Diet Type dated 01/23/2024 revealed that Resident # 6, #4, #8, #42, #17 and #41 had texture type 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-01-25 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to properly store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed. The facility failed to ensure foods were sealed and/or labeled properly in refrigerators and dry storage. The facility failed to ensure all food was not past expiration date. These failures could place residents that eat out of the kitchen at risk for food borne illnesses. The findings included: During an observation on 01/23/2024 between 9:55 AM and 10:25 AM of the kitchen revealed: Refrigerator #1 1. One open container of cottage cheese with an use by date of 01/06/2024. 2. One unopened container of cottage cheese with an use by date of 01/06/2024. 3. One plastic container with a seal contained canned mushrooms and was not labeled with a food item description or an use by date. 4. One plastic container with a seal contained canned black olives and was not labeled with a food item…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · C2026-04-15 · tag F0732 — widespread
    Post nurse staffing information every day.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, and interviews, the facility failed to post nurse staffing information that included the resident census for 3 days (04/13/2026, 04/14/2026, and 04/15/2026) of 3 days reviewed for required postings.The facility failed to include the daily resident census 04/13/2026, 04/14/2026 and 04/15/2026 on the daily nurse staffing required posting.This failure could place all residents, their families, and facility visitors at risk of not having access to information regarding staffing data and the facility census.Findings included:During an observation on 04/13/2026 at 9:10 a.m., the daily nurse staffing was posted on the front hallway across from the ADON's and DON's office. There was a zero for the resident census. During an observation on 04/14/2026 at 9:10 a.m., the daily nurse staffing was posted on the front hallway across from the ADON's and DON's office. There was a zero for the resident census. During an observation on 04/15/2026 at 9:10 a.m., the daily nurse staffing was posted on the front hallway across from the ADON's and DON's office. There was a zero for…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services 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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

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 3 of 52.1+0.9 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.7+1.3 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 51.1-0.1 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 53.2-0.2 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
WEST WHARTON COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICTOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 07/01/2023
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 07/01/2024
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 07/01/2023
THOMPSON, JOHNNYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2024
WILLIG, ZACHARYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2025
BROWNWOOD V ENTERPRISES LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/09/2025
BLAKE, GARYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; TRUSTEE OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2023
BLAKE, MALISAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/01/2023
HARRIS, ASHLEYIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 03/21/2025
NIGALYE, NARENDRAIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 21 rows in the source record cover these 18 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.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$5.2M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+6.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 50%Medicare 16%Other / private 34%

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

$250per resident / day
operating cost
$7,614per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$269per 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 675537. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-15, 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