Panola County Nursing & Rehabilitation
501 Cottage Rd, Carthage, TX 75633 · For profit - Corporation · 108 certified beds · (903) 693-7141 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604) — 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 (34) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 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 | 23.7% | 15.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.2% | 3.0% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.7% | 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 | 0.0% | 3.3% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 10.1% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 19.1% | 18.0% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.4% | 3.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 13.1% | 13.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 22.0% | 9.6% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 88.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 16.3% | 25.7% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 8.5% | 12.3% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.68 | 2.17 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.92 | 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.
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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 32% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.4%CMS range 6.3–16.7 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.26 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 108 beds and averages 50.6 residents a day — about 47% occupied, or roughly 57 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 2.97 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.25 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.62 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 3.12 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.26 to 0.22 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 46% is about the same as 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
34 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 24 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2025-08-13 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — patternMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
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 effective pest control program to keep the facility free of water bugs for one (1) common area hallway near secure unit, and for one (room [ROOM NUMBER]) of 5 rooms reviewed for pests.The facility failed to maintain an effective pest free from water bugs for Resident #36 and a dead water bug located in one common hall located near the secured These failures placed residents at risk for the potential spread of infection, cross-contamination, food-borne illness, and decreased quality of life.Findings included:Record review of Resident #36's admission Record indicated she was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included acute respiratory infection (a sudden illness affecting the respiratory system), Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a progressive lung disease that makes it hard to breath), Type II Diabetes (a chronic condition that affects the way the body metabolizes sugar leading to…
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 · D2025-08-13 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 interview, and record review, the facility failed to coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review (PASRR) program to include all residents with newly evident or possible serious mental disorder for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #28) reviewed for the PASRR program. The facility failed to ensure Resident #28 was referred for a PASRR (Level II) evaluation when she admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a possible serious mental disorder. This failure could place residents at risk for a diminished quality of life and not receiving necessary care and services in accordance with individually assessed needs.The findings included: Record review of the face sheet, dated 08/13/25, reflected Resident #28 was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type (chronic mental health condition characterized primarily by symptoms of schizophrenia, such as hallucinations or delusions, and symptoms of a mood disorder,…
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 before2025-08-13 · 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 to meet each resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs for 2 of 16 residents reviewed for care plans. (Resident #8, Resident #43)1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #8's care plan had interventions to be used for the use of a self-releasing seat belt, on his motorized wheelchair. 2. The facility failed to implement the comprehensive person-centered care plan for Resident #43's low air loss mattress on the correct settings for her current weight. These failures could place residents at risk of not having individual needs met, a decreased quality of life, and cause residents not to receive needed services. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #8’s face sheet dated 8/12/25 indicated Resident #8 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #8 had diagnoses including cerebral palsy (is a group 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 before2025-08-13 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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 each resident's person-centered comprehensive care plan was reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment for 1 of 16 residents (Resident #6), reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to revise and update Resident #6's care plan after she was coded on the annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] for use of a diuretic and an antiplatelet. This failure could affect residents by placing them at risk of not receiving appropriate interventions to meet their current needs.Findings included: Record review of Resident #6's face sheet dated 8/12/25 indicated Resident #6 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #6 had diagnoses including hemiplegia (is paralysis that affects only one side of your body) and hemiparesis (is one-sided muscle weakness) following cerebral infarction (is the death of brain tissue due to a blockage of blood flow), other cerebral infarction due to…
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 before2025-08-13 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living receives the necessary services to maintain good nutrition for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #50) reviewed for ADLs. The facility did not ensure Resident #50 received set-up assistance during the lunch meal on 08/11/25. This failure could place residents at risk of decreased quality of life, weight loss, and injury related to choking.The findings included: Record review of the face sheet, dated 08/13/25, reflected Resident #50 was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction, affecting the right dominant side (right-sided weakness/paralysis from a stroke), history of a stroke, and the need for assistance with personal care. Record review of the admission MDS assessment, dated 06/26/25, reflected Resident #50 had clear speech, was understood by others, and was able to understand…
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 before2025-08-13 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
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 an ongoing program of activities in accordance with the comprehensive assessment to meet the interests and the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 2 of 16 residents reviewed for activities. (Resident's #30 and #50) The facility failed to ensure Resident #30, and Resident #50 were offered to participate in activities on 08/11/25 and 08/12/25. This failure could place residents at risk for not having activities to meet their interests or needs and a decline in their physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being.The findings included: 1. Record review of the face sheet, dated 08/13/25, reflected Resident #30 was a [AGE] year-old female who initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (neurodegenerative disease that causes memory loss). Record review of the annual MDS assessment, dated 04/22/25, reflected Resident #30 had clear speech, was understood by others, and was usually able…
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 before2025-08-13 · 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 review the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #49) reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility failed to ensure Resident #49's fall mat was utilized while he was in his bed on 08/11/25 and 08/12/25. This failure could place residents at risk of injury or harm and a decreased quality of care related to falls.The findings included: Record review of the face sheet, dated 08/12/25, reflected Resident #49 was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of paraplegia (paralysis of the legs and lower body, typically caused by spinal injury or disease), apraxia (inability to execute purposeful, previously learned motor tasks, despite physical ability and willingness, as a result of brain damage) following a stroke, and paranoid schizophrenia (A serious mental health condition that affects how people think, feel and behave. It may…
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 before2025-08-13 · 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 needed respiratory care were provided with such care, consistent with professional standards of practices for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #31) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident # 31's internal filter (the air passes through a series of filters that remove impurities, ensuring that the oxygen delivered to the patient is of high quality) in the oxygen concentrator (take air from your surroundings, extract oxygen and filter it into purified oxygen for you to breathe) was free of white/yellow, fuzzy particles. This failure could place residents at risk for respiratory infections.Findings included: Record review of Resident #31's face sheet dated 8/13/25 indicated Resident #31 was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #31 had diagnoses including heart failure (is a condition where the heart can't pump enough blood to meet 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-13 · tag F0699 — isolatedProvide care or services that was trauma informed and/or culturally competent.
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 that residents who are trauma survivors receive culturally competent, trauma-informed care in accordance with professional standards of practice and accounting for residents' experiences and preferences in order to eliminate or mitigate triggers that may cause re-traumatization of the resident for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #6) reviewed for trauma-informed care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #6 had a care plan to address past trauma with a PTSD diagnosis. Resident #6 completed a brief trauma assessment on [DATE] which indicated a positive trauma screen. This failure could place residents at an increased risk for psychological distress due to re-traumatization.Findings included: Record review of Resident #6's face sheet dated [DATE] indicated Resident #6 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #6 had diagnoses including post-traumatic stress disorder (is a mental…
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 · D2025-08-13 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide 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 administering of all drugs and biologicals, to meet the needs of 2 of 16 residents (Resident #31 and Resident #26) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #31's Claritin (Loratadine) order had a dosage for administration. The facility failed to ensure RN B documented the medication order change for Resident #26's Folic Acid 400 MCG to 1000MCG on 8/12/25, which resulted in RN B documenting administration of the wrong medication dosage on the MAR. These failures could place residents at risk for inaccurate drug administration.Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #31's face sheet dated 8/13/25 indicated Resident #31 was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #31 had diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (is a lung condition that obstructs airflow,…
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 24 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-13 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure 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 observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to act upon the recommendations of the pharmacist report of irregularities and to ensure the attending physician documented in the resident's medical record that the identified irregularity has been reviewed and what, if any, action has been taken to address it in response to the pharmacist report for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #35) reviewed for (MRR) Medication Regimen Review. The facility failed to ensure Resident #35's Medication Regimen Review dated 4/30/25, had a specific duration for the extended duration beyond 14 days of PRN Ativan (Lorazepam). This failure could place residents at risk from maintaining their highest practicable level of physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being, and could place them at risk for adverse consequences related to medication therapy. Findings included: Record review of Resident #35's face sheet dated 8/12/25 indicated Resident #35 was an [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-13 · 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 and sanitary environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 (Resident #8) of 16 residents reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure LVN C did not place Resident #8 feeding tubing, in his bed during g-tube medication administration on 8/12/25. This failure could place a resident at risk for an infection. Findings included:Record review of Resident #8's face sheet dated 8/12/25 indicated Resident #8 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #8 had diagnoses including cerebral palsy (is a group of conditions that affect movement and posture), paraplegia (is paralysis that affects your legs, but not your arms), abnormal posture, contractures (is a type of scarring in your soft tissues that causes them to tighten and stiffen),…
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 before2024-06-05 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for 5 of 17 residents reviewed for environment. (Residents #9, #35, #36, #16, and #7) The facility failed to ensure Resident #35 and Resident #36 had a clean room free from dust and dead roaches. The facility failed to repair Resident #9 ceiling tiles in room with water spots, due to water damage. The facility failed to ensure Resident #16's room was free of roaches. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7's room was free of water bugs. The facility failed to repair the ceiling in hall by the dining area. The facility had a trash can catching rainwater. These failures could place residents at risk of an unsafe or uncomfortable environment and a decrease in quality of life and self-worth. Findings included: Record review of Resident #35's face sheet indicated she was an [AGE] year-old female initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis included: unspecified…
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 before2024-06-05 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop 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 to meet each resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs for 3 of 17 residents reviewed for care plans. (Resident #28, Resident #47, Resident #50) 1. The facility failed to provide Resident #28 with scheduled smoke breaks. Resident #28's care plan indicated he wished to smoke. 2. The facility failed to develop a care plan for Resident #47's ADL dependence, dietary needs, vision impairment, bowel/bladder status, and diagnoses of anemia (is when you have low levels of healthy red blood cells to carry oxygen throughout your body), constipation, insomnia, and gastroesophageal reflux disease (is a condition in which stomach acid repeatedly flows back up into the tube connecting the mouth and stomach, called the esophagus). 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #50's contractures (a permanent tightening of the muscles, tendons, skin, and nearby tissues 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 before2024-06-05 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — patternProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
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 provide an ongoing program of activities in accordance with the comprehensive assessment to meet the interests and the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 1 memory care unit reviewed for activities. The facility failed to provide meaningful activities for dementia (impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions that interferes with doing everyday activities) residents on the memory care unit. This failure could place residents at risk for not having activities to meet their interests or needs and a decline in their physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Findings included: During an observation on 06/03/24 at 9:32 a.m., the AD had a large television playing music in the dining area of the memory care unit. Approximately 8 residents were in the dining area. During an observation on 06/03/24 at 10:21 a.m.-12:00 p.m., the dining and sitting area nor hallways had any memory care/dementia focused activities. Television on in dining area but residents did not show interest. During…
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 before2024-06-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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 has failed to ensure that the resident environment remains as free of accident hazards as possible and provide supervision to prevent avoidable accidents for 3 of 16 residents (Resident #30, Resident #31, Resident #50) and 3 of 5 staff (CNA A, CNA H, DON) reviewed for transfer and supervision. The facility failed to ensure CNA A did not leave the secure unit unsupervised on 06/04/24 which resulted in Resident #30 ambulating without her wheelchair and with no supervision. The facility failed to ensure CNA H performed a safe 1 person transfer which resulted in Resident #31 obtaining a skin tear to his forearm on 05/28/24. The facility failed to ensure CNA H did not transfer Resident #50 without another staff assistance on 04/07/24. During one person transfer, Resident #50 obtained a skin tear during transfer. The facility failed to ensure the DON did not provide incontinent care without another staff assistance on 05/08/24. The DON left Resident #50…
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 · E2024-06-05 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — patternProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
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 have sufficient nursing staff to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing of each resident, as determined by resident assessments and individual plans of care and considering the number, acuity and diagnoses of the facility's resident population for 3 (Resident #50,#32, and #31) of 16 residents residing on the secured unit. The facility failed to have sufficient staff available to provide resident care and supervision to prevent falls with injury on the secured unit for 3 of 3 months reviewed for staffing (March 2024-May2024). This failure could put residents at risk of not receiving necessary care and supervision to maintain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing. Findings Included: 1. Record review of an undated face sheet revealed Resident #50 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted [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 · Ecited before2024-06-05 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment, and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 4 of 14 residents (#35, #36, #3 and #6) reviewed for infection control practices. 1.The Facility failed to ensure Resident #35 and #36 had wash basins stored properly with names and in bags. 2. The facility failed to ensure wipes with feces were properly discarded and were left on Resident #3 and #6's bedroom floor. These failures could place residents at risk of exposure to communicable diseases, cross-contamination, and infections. Findings included: Record review of Resident #35's face sheet indicated she was an [AGE] year-old female initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis included: unspecified dementia (dementia without a specific diagnosis), restlessness and agitation (agitation is 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 · E2024-06-05 · tag F0881 — failed to use antibiotics responsibly — patternImplement a program that monitors antibiotic use.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement an antibiotic stewardship program that included antibiotic use protocols for 6 of 6 months (January 2024 through June 2024) reviewed for Infection Control Tracking and Trending. -The facility did not implement the antibiotic orders protocol in their Antibiotic Stewardship policy. -The facility had missing information on the Tracking and Trending Logs as to the outcome of the antibiotic use (if the infections were resolved or not). -The facility did not implement the 72-hour Antibiotic Time Out protocol in their Antibiotic Stewardship program. These failures could place residents with infections at risk for unnecessary antibiotic use and increased infections that are resistant to antibiotics. Findings included: Record review of the Antibiotic Stewardship Policy revised 02/2022 indicated Goals: Prescribers will document a dose, duration, and indication for all antibiotic usage. Policy: Antibiotic Stewardship Program (ASP) Core Elements: 5. Tracking: The Facility monitors at least one process measure of antibiotic…
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 · D2024-06-05 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor 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 promote care for residents in a manner and in an environment that maintained or enhanced each resident's dignity and respect in full recognition of his or her individuality for 2 of 17 residents reviewed for dignity. (Resident #31, Resident #49) The facility to ensure CNA H did not push Resident #31 backwards in his wheelchair from his room to the dining room. The facility failed to ensure LVN D did not stand up while assisting Resident #49 with his lunch meal. These failures placed residents at risk for diminished quality of life, loss of dignity and self-worth. Findings included: 1. Record review of a face sheet printed 06/03/24 indicated Resident #31 was an [AGE] year-old male and was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including metabolic encephalopathy (as an alteration in consciousness caused due to brain dysfunction (due to impaired cerebral metabolism)) and Parkinson's disease (is a progressive disorder that affects the nervous…
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 · D2024-06-05 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
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 right to be free from any physical restraints imposed for purposes of convenience and not required to treat medical symptoms for 1 of 16 residents reviewed for restraint use (Resident #30). The facility failed to ensure Resident #30 was free from physical restraints in the form of CNA A locking her wheelchair which did not allow her to move freely around the secured unit. This failure could place residents at risk for a decreased quality of life, a decline in physical functioning and injury. Findings included: Record review of a face sheet printed on 06/05/24 indicated Resident #30 was a [AGE] year-old, female and was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease (is a progressive disease beginning with mild memory loss and possibly leading to loss of the ability to carry on a conversation and respond to the environment), dementia (is a general term for loss of memory, language, problem-solving and other…
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 · D2024-06-05 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
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 baseline care plan for each resident that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality care within 48 hours of a resident's admission including the minimum healthcare information necessary to properly care for 2 of 7 residents reviewed for new admissions. (Resident #110 and Resident #111) The facility failed to develop a baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission for Residents #110 and #111. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving care and services to meet their needs. Findings included: 1. Record review of an undated face sheet revealed Resident #110 was an [AGE] year-old male admitted [DATE] with the diagnoses of cellulitis to lower extremities (skin infection to legs), diabetes mellitus (disease that affects blood sugar levels), and hypertension (high blood pressure). Record review of an incomplete admission…
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 before2024-06-05 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
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 each resident's person-centered comprehensive care plan was reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment for 1 of 17 residents (Residents #50), reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to revise and update Resident #50's comprehensive care plan to reflect change in diet order from regular to pureed. The facility failed to revise and update Resident #50's comprehensive care plan to reflect swallowing disorder of coughing or choking during meals or when swallowing medications. The facility failed to ensure Resident #50's care plan for ADL dependence was updated to reflect a change from substantial-maximal assist to dependent assist with transfer per the MDS. These deficient practices could affect residents by placing them at risk of not receiving appropriate interventions to meet their current needs. Findings included: Record review of a face sheet printed 06/03/24 indicated Resident #50 was [AGE] year-old, male 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-05 · 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 respiratory care was provided consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for respiratory care. (Resident #39) The facility failed to ensure Resident #39's nebulizer mask (provide vaporized medicine into the airway) was stored in a bag after use. The facility failed to ensure Resident #39's nebulizer mask was labeled and dated. These failures could place residents at risk of respiratory infections. Findings included: Record review of a face sheet printed 06/05/24 indicated Resident #39 was a [AGE] year-old, male and admitted [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (is a chronic inflammatory lung disease that causes obstructed airflow from the lungs) and emphysema (is a lung disease that results from damage to the walls of the alveoli in your lungs). Record review of a quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #39 was usually understood and usually…
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 · D2024-06-05 · tag F0732 — isolatedPost nurse staffing information every day.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to post the daily nurse staffing information with the current date, resident census, and numbers of staff actual hours worked at the beginning of each shift for 3 of 3 days reviewed, in a place readily accessible to residents and visitors, in that: The facility failed to update and post the daily nurse staffing information (current date, resident census, and numbers of staff actual hours worked) on 06/03/2024,06/04/2024, and 06/05/2024. This failure could affect residents, their families, and facility visitors by placing them at risk of not having access to information regarding the numbers of staff caring for the residents each shift and facility census. The findings included: An observation on 06/03/2024 at 9:30 a.m. revealed the daily staffing pattern (number of nurses and CNAs working with each resident each shift) posted was from 05/30/2024. An observation on 06/04/2024 at 10:45 a.m. revealed the daily nurse staffing pattern posted was from 06/03/2024. An observation on 06/05/2024 at 2:00 p.m. revealed the daily nurse…
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 before2024-06-05 · 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 each residents' drug regimen was free from unnecessary psychotropic drugs (without adequate behavior monitoring) for 1 (Resident # 47) of 5 residents whose medications were reviewed in that: 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #47 had an appropriate diagnosis for his prescribed Seroquel (Quetiapine; is an antipsychotic medication that treats several kinds of mental health conditions including schizophrenia (is a serious mental illness that affects how a person thinks, feels, and behaves) and bipolar disorder (is a mental illness that causes unusual shifts in a person's mood, energy, activity levels, and concentration)) 2.The facility failed to ensure Resident #47 had behavior monitoring (monitor activities and mood) for his prescribed Seroquel. 3.The facility failed to ensure Resident #47 had side effects monitoring (are defined as unintended responses to approved pharmaceuticals (is any kind of drug used for medicinal purposes) given in…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-05 · tag F0810 — isolatedProvide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
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 provide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance to ensure that the resident can use the assistive devices when consuming meals for 1 (Resident #19) of 3 residents reviewed for special eating equipment and assistance when consuming meals, in that: The failed to assess and provide Resident #19 with an assistive device to helps prevent food from accidently being pushed off the plate while eating during meal service to minimize food spillage. This failure could place residents at risk for harm by weight loss, diminished independence, and self-esteem. The findings included: Record review of a face sheet dated 06/03/24 indicated Resident #19 was an [AGE] year-old, male and admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's disease (is a progressive disease beginning with mild memory loss and possibly leading to loss of the ability to carry on a conversation and respond to 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-05 · tag F0813 — isolatedHave a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
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 and ensure safe and sanitary storage of residents' food items for 1 of 12 resident personal refrigerators reviewed for food safety (Resident #26). The facility failed to ensure the refrigerator for Resident #26 did not contain a decomposing banana, watermelon, and expired meat. This failure could place resident at risk for food borne illnesses. Findings included: Record review of a face sheet dated 12/3/2023 indicated Resident #26 was a [AGE] year-old male, admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Parkinson's Disease (A disorder of the central nervous system that affects movement, often including tremors), Hypomagnesemia (happens when you have a lower-than-normal level of magnesium in your blood), Dysphagia (a medical term for difficulty swallowing). Record review of a quarterly MDS dated [DATE] indicated Resident #26 usually understood others and usually made himself understood. The MDS indicated Resident #26…
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 before2023-04-19 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor 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 observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to a clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, which included but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safety, for 4 of 14 residents (Resident #29, Resident #28, Resident #33, and Resident #4) reviewed for a homelike environment. 1. The facility failed to ensure water damaged ceiling tiles above Resident #29's bed were replaced. 2. The facility failed to keep Resident #28 and Resident #33's Geri chairs (are large, padded chairs with wheeled bases, and are designed to assist seniors with limited mobility) clean. 3. The facility failed to keep Resident #4's feeding pump and pole clean. These failures could place residents at risk for diminished quality of life due to the lack of a well-kept environment. Findings included: 1. Record review of an undated face sheet revealed Resident #29 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including schizoaffective…
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 · E2023-04-19 · tag F0641 — patternEnsure 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 an accurate MDS assessment was completed for 4 of 14 residents reviewed for MDS accuracy. (Resident #13, Resident #16, Resident #7, and Resident #204) 1. The facility failed to accurately document Resident #13's and Resident #16's antidepressant usage. 2. The facility failed to accurately document Resident # 7's PASRR status. 3. The facility failed to accurately document Resident #204's fall history on the MDS. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving needed care and services. Findings included: 1. Record review of an undated face sheet revealed Resident #13 was a 76- year-old-female, admitted on [DATE] with the diagnoses of anemia (a condition in which the body does not have enough healthy red blood cells), depression (a group of conditions associated with the elevation or lowering of a person's mood), and COVID-19 (an infectious disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus). Record review of a MDS dated [DATE] for Resident #13…
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 before2023-04-19 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop 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 observations, 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 includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 4 of 6 residents (Resident #4, Resident #19, Resident #33, Resident #42) reviewed for comprehensive person-centered care plans related to limited range of motion or contractures. The facility failed to care plan Resident #19's and Resident #33's limited range of motion. The facility failed to develop interventions for Resident #4 to address contractures and limited range of motion. The facility failed to implement an intervention to document meal consumption for Resident #19 and Resident #42. These failures could place residents at risk of not having their individualized needs met and a decline in their quality of care and life. Findings included:…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-04-19 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — patternProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with limited range of motion receives appropriate treatment and services to increase range of motion and/or to prevent further decrease in range of motion for 3 of 6 residents (Resident #4, Resident #19, Resident #33) reviewed for range of motion and mobility, in that: Resident #4 who had functional limitation in range of motion (interfered with daily functions or placed residents at risk for injury) to unilateral upper extremity and bilateral lower extremities was not provided treatment and services to prevent further decrease in range of motion. Resident #19 who had functional limitation in range of motion to bilateral upper extremities was not provided treatment and services to prevent further decrease in range of motion. Resident #33 who had functional limitation in range of motion to unilateral upper extremity and bilateral was not provided treatment and services to prevent further decrease in range of motion. These…
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 before2023-04-19 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide the necessary services to maintain personal hygiene for residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living receives the for 2 of 16 residents reviewed for ADLs (Residents #10, Resident #33). The facility did not clean or trim Resident #10's fingernails. The facility failed to ensure Resident #33 did not have facial hair and received schedule shower/bed baths. These failures could place residents who required assistance from staff for ADLs at risk of not receiving care and services to meet their needs which could result in poor care, risk for skin breakdown, feelings of poor self-esteem, lack of dignity and health. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #10's electronic face sheet dated 04/29/2022 revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of paralytic syndrome (symmetric, ascending weakness), muscle wasting and atrophy (Muscle atrophy is the wasting or thinning of muscle mass), dysphagia…
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 before2023-04-19 · 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, based on the comprehensive assessment of a resident, residents who had not used psychotropic drugs were not given these drugs unless the medication was necessary to treat a specific condition as diagnosed and documented in the clinical record for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #204) reviewed for psychotropic medications. The facility failed to ensure Resident #204 had an appropriate diagnosis for usage of Olanzapine (antipsychotic). This failure could place residents at risk of being over-medicated or experience undesirable side effects. Findings included: Record review of a face sheet dated 04/18/23 revealed Resident #240 was [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including major depressive disorder (a mood disorder that interferes with daily life), anxiety (persistent and excessive worry that interferes with daily activities), hallucinations (a false perception of objects or events involving your senses: sight, sound, smell,…
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.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to GULF COAST LTC PARTNERS — 20 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 3 of 5 | 2.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 3.0 | ≈ chain avg |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 1.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 2.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
The other 19 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.4★, per CMS)
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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SOUTH LIMESTONE HOSPITAL DISTRICT | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 01/15/2024 |
| PRICE, LARRY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/15/2024 |
| CARTHAGE LTC PARTNERS, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/15/2024 |
| BERGERON, BOBBY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/15/2024 |
| NICHOLSON, LOUIS | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 01/15/2024 |
| CARTHAGE ASSOCIATES, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/15/2024 |
| GOVATHOTI, DEEPTI | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/15/2023 |
| YOUNG, MISTI | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/28/2024 |
3 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.
A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
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
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.
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 675387. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-13, 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.