Songbird Lodge

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

50.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 68 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 77.1% 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 0.32 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 52% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 121 beds and averages 70.6 residents a day — about 58% occupied, or roughly 50 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.06 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.19 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.76 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 2.58 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.25 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.20 to 0.15 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 99% 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

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 · F2025-12-11 · tag F0801 — widespread
  Employ 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 set to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service for 1 of 3 dietary staff (DS G) reviewed for qualified dietary staff. The facility failed to ensure the facility's DS G met the requirements for a certified dietary manager. This failure could place residents at risk of not having their nutritional needs met and place them at risk for food born illnesses.Record review of DS G on 12.10.2025 revealed no evidence of a food handler's certificate. During an interview on 12.09.2025 at 05:40 p.m. the DM stated one of the dishwashers did not have a food handler's certificate. She stated he only washed dishes and did not handle any food for the residents. She stated she was not sure why he had not gotten the certificate. She stated she did not feel like this could cause any harm to the residents. She stated she was responsible for monitoring the staff to ensure that they had the proper training to work in the kitchen During an interview on…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2025-12-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, interviews the facility failed to prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation. The facility failed to ensure kitchen staff (DS F) did not prepare food with an active infection. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for infection and cross contamination. Findings include: During an observation on 12.09.2025 at 05:30 p.m. observed dietary aide F in the kitchen with a mask below his nose and only covering his mouth. Dietary aid F had on gloves and was lying out tortillas on a plate and placing cheese on top of the tortillas. During an interview on 12.09.2025 at 05:32 p.m., Dietary aid F stated he had a note from his doctor stating for him to not work due to a respiratory infection. He stated he had given the note to his DM, and she told him had to work and he could not leave. During an interview and record review on 12.09.2025 at 05:35 p.m. observed a return to work/school note from a local medical center that stated the dietary aid F was…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-12-11 · 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 that included measurable objectives and time frames to meet, attain, and/or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 3 of 17 residents (Residents #2, Resident #7, and Resident #64) reviewed for care plans.The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 had a care plan in place that included fluid restriction.The facility failed to ensure Resident #7, and Resident #64 had a care plan in place that included a fall mat.These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving individualized care and services to meet their needs.Findings included:1. Record review of Resident #2's electronic face sheet, dated 12/08/2025, reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic kidney disease (inability of kidneys to filter toxins out of the blood) and dependence on…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-11 · tag F0728 — failed to protect against nurse-aide misconduct — pattern
  Ensure that nurse aides who have worked more than 4 months, are trained and competent; and nurse aides who have worked less than 4 months are enrolled in appropriate training.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to not use any individual working in the facility as a nurse aide for more than four months on a full-time basis unless that individual has completed a training and competency evaluation program for 3 (SNA M, SNA N, and SNA O) of 4 student nurse aides reviewed for nursing services. The facility failed to ensure SNA M, SNA N, and SNA O were certified within the required time. This failure could place residents at risk for receiving inappropriate care from individuals whose skill level was not known.Findings included: Record review on 12/09/2025 of the facility's employee files revealed: -SNA M had a hire date of 4/18/2023 and worked full time as of 12/11/2025 An employability status check dated 12/11/2025 indicated SNA M had a CNA certification expiration date of 5/22/15. -SNA N had a hire date of 4/18/2023 was currently working full time. An employability status check dated 12/11/2025 indicated SNA M had no CNA certification. -SNA O had a hire date of 3/26/2025 was currently working full time. An employability status check…

  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
• Potential for harm · E2025-12-11 · 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

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the menu was followed for 1 of 5 halls (B hall) reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to ensure 68 of 68 residents receiving a lunch meal from the kitchen received pecan pie as posted on the weekly menu for lunch on 12/07/2025. The facility failed to ensure 3 of 18 residents receiving a meal from the kitchen on B hall received lunch menu items roasted pork loin and mashed sweet potatoes on 12/07/2025. These failures could place residents at risk of poor intake from being disappointed they did not receive the menu items listed.Findings includeDuring an observation on 12/07/2025 at 12:02 p.m., the lunch menu written on the white board outside the kitchen reflected roasted pork loin, gravy, mashed sweet potatoes, parmesan brussel sprouts, honey roll, and vanilla pudding. Weekly menu posted at the rear of the dining area reflected roasted pork loin, gravy, mashed sweet potatoes, parmesan brussel sprouts, honey roll, and pecan pie. During an observation on 12/07/2025 at 1:00 p.m.,…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-12-11 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — pattern
  Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and records review, the facility's Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) committee failed to implement an appropriate action plan to address identified quality deficiencies for 1 of 1 facility. The QAPI committee failed to implement the corrective actions outlined on the Plan of Correction dated 03/14/2025 for deficient practice F728 for 3 (SNA J, SNA M, and SNA N) of 4 SNAs reviewed. This failure placed residents at risk for substandard quality of care due to the failure of the facility to act on an identified problem affecting resident safety. Findings include: Review of a CMS 2567 dated 03/14/2025 revealed that, based on observation, interviews, and record review, a deficient practice was cited at F728 (Facility Hiring and use of a Nurse) during an abbreviated survey that began on 03/13/2025. Interviews and records revealed that the facility failed to ensure SNA A (SNA M) was certified within the required time. Review of the facility's 03/15/2025 Plan of Correction which was submitted in response to the 03/14/2025 abbreviated survey revealed the…

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

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-11 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 (Resident #32) of 17 reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The facility failed to ensure the MDS dated 11.27.2025 reflected Resident #32 did not have a diagnosis of pneumonia. This failure could place residents at risk of inaccurate assessments and not receiving appropriate care according to their status.Findings included:Record review of Resident #32's electronic face sheet, dated 12.09.2025, revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted [KA1] on 11.23.2024, readmitted 12.08.2025, with diagnoses of pneumonia, unspecified organism, history of falling, unspecified dementia, hypertension (high blood pressure), iron deficiency anemia (blood disorder), presence of cardiac pacemaker. Record review of Resident #32's Annual MDS, dated 11.27.2025, revealed: Section C - Cognitive Patterns Resident #32 had a BIMS score of 03 (meaning severely impaired cognition). Section I-Active…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-11 · 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 store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments and to permit only authorized personnel to have access for 1 of 5 (Medication Cart #1) medication carts reviewed for . The facility failed to ensure Medication Cart #1 was locked when unattended by nurse. This failure could place residents at risk of harm or decline in health due to lack of potency of medications/biologicals or misappropriation of medications. Findings included: During an observation on 12/10/2025 at 1:15 p.m., Medication Cart #1 was left unattended and unlocked, medication cart keys were inserted and hanging from the narcotic box. During an interview on 12/10/2025 at 1:17 p.m. RN E stated Medication Cart #1 was his responsibility, as well as the medication cart keys inserted and hanging from the narcotic drawer. RN E stated the medication carts were supposed to be always locked while not in use. RN E stated there was a resident falling, and he had to help her to her room. He stated, it still should have been locked prior to helping the…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-11 · tag F0849 — isolated
  Arrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to collaborate with hospice representatives and coordinate the hospice care planning process for each resident receiving hospice services, to ensure quality of care for the resident, ensuring communication with the hospice medical director, the resident's attending physician and others participating in the provision of care for 1 (Resident #64) of 17 residents reviewed for hospice services. The facility failed to maintain required hospice forms and documentation that included certificate of terminal illness to ensure that the needs of the residents were addressed and met 24 hours per day to ensure Resident #64 received adequate end-of-life care.This failure could place the residents who receive hospice services at-risk of receiving inadequate end-of-life care due to a lack of documentation, coordination of care, and communication of resident needs. Findings include Record review of Resident #64's electronic face sheet dated 12/08/2025 reflected she 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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
  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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments for 2 (Resident #4 and Resident #5) of 7 residents reviewed for label and storage of drugs and biologicals. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4's and Resident #5's medications were locked when unattended. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4's respiratory treatments were not left at bedside and used unsupervised. This failure could place residents at risk of having access to unauthorized medications, leading to possible harm or drug diversions.Findings included:Resident #4Review of Resident #4's Face Sheet, dated 10/30/2025, revealed a [AGE] year-old female, admitted [DATE], readmitted [DATE], with diagnoses included UTI (Urinary Tract Infection), metabolic encephalopathy (a brain dysfunction caused by metabolic disturbances, leading to symptoms like confusion, memory loss, and altered consciousness), malnutrition, constipation, and depression.Review of Resident #4's Annual…

  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

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

Fines & penalties

$10,210 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $10,210 — penalty dated 2024-09-06

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CREATIVE SOLUTIONS IN HEALTHCARE — 149 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in TX