Clarksville Nursing Center
300 East Baker St., Clarksville, TX 75426 · Government - Hospital district · 132 certified beds · (903) 427-2236 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
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609) — 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
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) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 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 held steady at 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 10.6% | 15.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.0% | 3.0% | 5.4% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| 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 | 0.0% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better 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 | 2.3% | 3.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 6.3% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 2.9% | 18.0% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.5% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.4% | 3.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 9.4% | 13.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 1.1% | 9.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.8% | 1.5% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 87.9% | 88.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 21.9% | 25.7% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 33.6% | 12.3% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.16 | 2.17 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.37 | 2.06 | 1.80 | worse |
* 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.
Met the expected recovery: 53.3% 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 30 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 0.33 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 54% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% 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 | 10.3%CMS range 6.4–17.9 | 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 | 53.3% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 50.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 56.7% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 80.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care 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 | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 1.04 | 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 132 beds and averages 49.9 residents a day — about 38% occupied, or roughly 82 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 3.01 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.49 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.48 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 2.65 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.16 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.53 to 0.39 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 40% 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 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.
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 · E2026-04-14 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — patternMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
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 record review, resident and staff interviews and observations, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for 3 of 15 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3) reviewed for environment, in that: The facility failed to ensure water temperatures in the resident showers in 2 of 3 of the facility communal showers located on 100 hall and 300 hall was kept at a comfortable temperature for residents. The third shower, located on 200 hall, was inoperable due to construction. This could place residents at risk of unsanitary or uncomfortable conditions by not having hot water available for showers. The findings were: 1.Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 04/14/2026 revealed a [AGE] year-old male admitted [DATE] with diagnosis that included cerebrovascular disease with left side hemiplegia (a condition affecting blood flow to the brain with left sided paralysis), Diabetes Type II (a chronic condition where the body resists insulin or fails to produce enough…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-10 · tag F0699 — patternProvide 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 interviews and record reviews, 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 4 of 5 residents (Resident #2, Resident #7, Resident #8, and Resident #11) reviewed for trauma-informed care.The facility did not ensure the care plans of Resident #2, Resident #7, Resident #8, and Resident #11, who had histories of trauma, identified possible triggers and interventions.This failure could place residents at an increased risk for severe psychological distress due to re-traumatization.1.Record review of Resident #2's face sheet, dated 12/10/25, reflected Resident #2 was a [AGE] year-old male, originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included PTSD (a disorder in which a person has difficulty recovering after…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-10 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — patternEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
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 it was free from a medication error rate of 5 percent or greater. The facility had a medication error rate of 8.82 %, based on 3 errors out of 34 opportunities, which involved 3 of 5 residents (Residents #15, #26, and #27) reviewed for medication administration. 1. The facility failed to ensure LVN K administered insulin correctly for Resident #15. 2. The facility failed to ensure RN B administered Aspirin 325 mg (a common strength of the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) used for pain/fever relief (headaches, colds, arthritis) and, at the doctor's direction, for heart/stroke prevention by reducing blood clots) as ordered by the physician for Resident #26 on 12/08/25. 3. The facility failed to ensure RN B administered Cyanocobalamin 2500 mcg (medication used to maintain the health of your metabolism, blood cells, and nerves) as ordered by the physician for Resident #27 on 12/08/25. These failures could place…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-10 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide food that was palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature for 9 of 9 confidential residents reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to ensure dietary staff provided food that was palatable and had an appetizing temperature on 12/09/25. This failure could place residents at risk of decreased food intake, hunger, and unwanted weight loss.Findings included: During a confidential resident group meeting 9 residents stated the food was lousy and cold. During an observation and interview on 12/09/25 at 12:16 p.m., lunch tray was sampled by the Dietary Manager and six surveyors. The sample tray consisted of chili bake which was lukewarm, carrots which were lukewarm, and salad was brown, soggy and withered. The Dietary Manager stated the chili bake and carrots was good to her, and salad was alright. During an interview on 12/10/25 at 4:37 p.m., CNA L stated residents had stated the food was not that great. CNA L stated she was unable to recall the resident's name.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed. The facility did not ensure:1. Food items were labeled and dated.2. Hair restraints were worn. 3. The kitchen staff had a Soap dispenser located in a place that did not prevent the staff contaminating the clean dish rack. These failures could place residents at risk for foodborne illness.Findings included: During the initial tour observation and interview with the Dietary Manager on 12/08/25 beginning at 11:02 a.m., the following was revealed: 1. Two cans of cut sweet potatoes undated. During an observation on 12/08/25 at 11:05 a.m., the soap dispenser was located over the clean dish rack next to the three-compartment sink. During an observation on 12/08/25 at 11:10 a.m. [NAME] O, [NAME] P and Dietary Manager hairnet were not covering her entire head while she prepared the lunch meal. There was loose hair sticking out. During an interview on 12/10/25 at 5:09 p.m., Dietary Aide F…
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 · D2025-12-10 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — isolatedAllow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
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 residents the right to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #47) reviewed for care plans.The facility failed to invite and include the input of Resident #47 and/or the resident's representative as members of the interdisciplinary team in Care Plan Conference meetings.This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the interventions, treatments, and care necessary for the resident to reach their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being by not involving the resident and/or the resident's representative in Care Plan Conference meetings. The findings included:Record review of Resident #47's face sheet, dated 10/12/2025 revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted [DATE] with diagnoses including cerebral infarction (occurs when a blood clot blocks an artery in the brain, cutting off oxygen and nutrients leading to brain tissue…
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 · D2025-12-10 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
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 was informed before, or at the time of admission, and periodically during the resident's stay, of services available in the facility and of charges for those services, which included charges for services not covered under Medicare/Medicaid or by the facility's per diem rate for 2 of 3 residents (Residents #15 and #19) reviewed for Medicare/Medicaid coverage. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #15 was given a NOMNC (is a notice that indicates when your care is set to end from a skilled nursing facility when discharged from skilled services prior to his covered days being exhausted. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #19 was given a SNF ABN when discharged from skilled services at the facility prior to covered days being exhausted. These failures could place residents at risk of not being aware of changes to services provided. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #15's face sheet, dated 12/10/25, reflected…
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 before2025-12-10 · 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, interviews and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights, that included measurable objectives and time frames to meet a resident's mental, nursing, and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for care plans.The facility failed to fully develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan that was specific for Resident #1 to address the resident's communication deficit.This failure could place residents at risk for not getting their medical, physical, and psychosocial needs met and not being provided with the necessary care or services and having personalized plans developed to address their specific needs.The findings were:Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 12/10/2025 revealed a [AGE] year-old female originally admitted [DATE] and readmitted [DATE] with diagnoses including aphasia (difficult…
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 · D2025-12-10 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is 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 provide the necessary care and services to ensure that a resident's abilities in activities of daily living do not diminish based on the comprehensive assessment and consistent with the resident's needs and choices for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #48) reviewed for activities of daily living. The facility failed to provide communication assistance to effectively communicate with staff for Resident #48. This failure could place residents at risk for decline and diminished quality of life.Findings included: Record review of Resident #48's face sheet dated 12/10/25 indicated he was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses Down syndrome (genetic condition leading to developmental delays), epilepsy (neurological condition marked by recurrent seizures), and cognitive communication deficit (struggle in communication due to cognitive problems). Record review of Resident #48's admission MDS dated [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 · D2025-12-10 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
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, observation, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents maintained acceptable parameters of nutritional status and is offered sufficient fluid intake to maintain proper hydration and health for 2 of 5 residents (Resident #13 and Resident #19) reviewed for nutrition. 1.The facility failed to ensure Resident #13 had water in his cup to drink on 12/08/25 and 12/09/25. 2. The facility did not ensure Resident #19 was given a shake as ordered by the physician. This failure could place residents at risk for decreased nutritional status, decline in health, serious illness, or hospitalization.Findings included: 1.Record review of Resident #13's face sheet dated 12/10/25 indicated he was an [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses diabetes mellitus (condition that causes the blood sugar to be elevated), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (lung disease that blocks airflow and makes it difficult to breathe), obstructive and reflux uropathy (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.
Show the remaining 24 citations
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-10 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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 that residents were free of significant medication errors for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #15) reviewed for insulin administration. The facility did not ensure LVN K administered Resident #15's Novolog (insulin medication) according to the manufacturer's instructions on 12/08/25. This failure could place residents at risk of medical complications and prevent them from receiving the therapeutic effects of their medications. Findings included: Record review of Resident #15's face sheet, dated 12/10/25, reflected Resident #15 was a [AGE] year-old male, admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Type 2 diabetes mellitus (lifelong condition where the pancreas makes little or no insulin, which leads to high blood sugar levels), stroke, and high blood pressure Record review of Resident #15's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 11/26/25, indicated Resident #15 made himself understood 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 before2025-12-10 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure all drugs were stored in a locked compartment, only accessible by authorized personnel, and labeled and dated correctly for 1 of 25 residents (Resident #11) observed for medication storage. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #11 did not have hydrocortisone cream and Neosporin on his bedside table and dresser. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving drugs and biologicals as needed, or overmedicating, .Findings include: Record review of Resident #11's face sheet dated 12/10/25 indicated he was a [AGE] year-old male who re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder), Dementia (cognitive decline that effects daily life caused by brain cell damage), major depressive disorder (persistent sadness, loss of interest, fatigue, and change in sleep/appetite), diabetes mellitus (chronic metabolism condition marked by high blood sugars), and presbyopia (natural age-related loss 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 · D2025-12-10 · 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 of 5 (Resident #19) residents reviewed for special eating equipment and assistance when consuming meals. The facility failed to ensure Resident #19 had a physician's ordered cup with lid for drinking fluids. This failure could place residents at risk for harm by weight loss, diminished independence, and self-esteem.Findings included:Record review of Resident #19's face sheet, dated 12/10/25, reflected Resident #19 was an [AGE] year-old female, admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis which included Alzheimer's (progressive disease that destroys memory and other important mental functions). Record review of Resident #19's order summary report, dated 12/10/25, reflected regular texture, thin consistency, fortified foods, and cup with lid 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 · D2025-12-10 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #13) room reviewed for infection control practices and enhanced barrier precautions. 1) The facility failed to ensure the Treatment nurse used the proper handwashing technique while providing wound care for Resident #13. 2) The facility failed to ensure the Treatment Nurse disinfected her scissors during wound care when she cut the dirty dressing and then cut the clean dressing with the contaminated scissors. These failures could place residents at increased risk for serious complications from a communicable disease that could diminish the residents' quality of life.Findings included: Record review of Resident #13's face sheet dated 12/10/25 indicated he was an [AGE] year-old male who admitted 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 · D2024-09-18 · 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 interview, and record review the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity that promoted maintenance or enhancement of quality of life for 1 of 14 residents reviewed for resident rights. (Resident #12) 1. The facility failed to treat Resident #12 with dignity and respect witnessed by Resident #43 when CNA D told Resident #12 Oh no ma'am, we are not fixing to do this because I am not going to be the one on 03/25/24 with an attitude and rude tone . These failures could place residents at risk for decreased quality of life, decreased self-esteem and increase anxiety. Findings included: 1. Record review of a face sheet dated on 09/17/2024 reflected Resident #12 was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of slurred speech (weakness in the muscles used for speech, which often causes slowed or slurred speech), anxiety disorder unspecified (a diagnosis given when someone experiences clinically significant anxiety but doesn't meet the criteria for 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 · D2024-09-18 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
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 Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level I assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #24) reviewed for PASRR Level I screenings. 1. The facility failed to ensure the accuracy of the PASRR Level 1 screening for Resident #24. The PASRR Level 1 screening did not indicate a diagnosis of mental illness, although the diagnosis (PTSD with an onset date of 04/16/21) was present upon Resident #24's re-admission date on 05/17/2024. 2. The facility failed to ensure the accuracy of the PASRR Level 1 screening for Resident #24. The PASRR Level 1 screening did not indicate a diagnosis of mental illness, after a new diagnosis of major depressive disorder (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest), with an onset date of 08/28/24. The facility did not complete a 1012 form to update the PASRR Level 1 with the new diagnosis until surveyor intervention 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-18 · 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 1 of 6 residents reviewed for care plans. (Resident #28) The facility failed to implement Resident #28's signed physician order dated 03/31/2024 for occupational therapy to evaluate Resident #28 for a coffee lid. This failure 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 included: 1. Record review of a face sheet dated on 09/17/2024 indicated Resident #28 was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of exudative age-related macular degeneration, left eye, stage, (a severe form of the disease that occurs when abnormal blood vessels grow under the retina and leak fluid and blood), muscle weakness (generalized) (lack of muscle strength), unsteadiness on feet…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-18 · 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 a resident who needed respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, the residents' goals, and preferences for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #147) reviewed for respiratory care and services. The facility failed to change the filter on an oxygen concentrator machine that were in use for Resident #147 on 09/16/24. This failure could place residents at risk for developing respiratory complications. Findings included: Record review of Resident #147's face sheet, dated 09/17/24, indicated he was a [AGE] year-old male, admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included heart failure (a chronic condition in which the heart is unable to pump blood effectively), and shortness of breath. Review of Resident #147 MDS reflected they did not have an OBRA MDS assessment completed at the time of this visit. It was not yet due to be completed. During an…
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 · Fcited before2023-08-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the facility's only kitchen and the facility's only dining room. The facility failed to ensure that a canister of oatmeal was closed properly in an airtight container after opening. The facility failed to ensure that dirty rags were stored in proper containers prior to being taken to the laundry. The facility failed to ensure that the walls and floors inside the kitchen were properly cleaned. The facility failed to ensure the toaster was cleaned after each use per facility protocol. The facility failed to ensure that trash was properly disposed of. The facility failed to ensure that the kitchens fryer was properly cleaned and the oil changed. The facility did not ensure the ice scoop was not left in the ice bucket during the lunch meal service. These failures could place residents at risk of cross-contamination and foodborne illness. Findings included: 1. During an observation on 08/14/2023 starting…
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 · E2023-08-16 · 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, and comfortable homelike environment for 2 of 13 resident rooms (room [ROOM NUMBER] and room [ROOM NUMBER]) and 1 of 1 dining room reviewed for physical environment. 1. The facility did not ensure room [ROOM NUMBER] had clean floors and walls. 2. The facility did not ensure the bathroom in room [ROOM NUMBER] had no holes and the sheetrock was in good repair. 3. The facility failed to repair scratches in the paint on the wall behind the head of the bed and on the wall next to the bed in room [ROOM NUMBER]A. 4. The facility failed to ensure the wallpaper in the dining room was in good repair. This failure could place the residents at risk for decreased quality of life and infection due to unsanitary conditions. The findings included: 1. During an observation on 08/14/2023 at 10:24 AM, the dining room had crinkled, floral, boarder wallpaper that had fallen off the wall and was held together by clear tape. During an…
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 · E2023-08-16 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure 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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the meals served to residents met the nutritional needs of residents for 1 of 1 meal (the lunch meal), as evidenced by: The facility failed to ensure [NAME] F followed the menu for the lunch meal on 08/14/23. The facility failed to ensure [NAME] F followed the recipe for pureeing the hamburger beef patty for the lunch meal. These failures could place residents at risk for weight loss, not having their nutritional needs met, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included: During a record review of the facility menu (lunch meal) for Monday 08/14/23 indicated: chicken fajitas, chopped cilantro, Spanish rice, shredded lettuce, diced tomatoes and an oatmeal raisin cookie was served for lunch. (Cycle: Southwest 2 - 1st week dated 07/20/23 - Primary) During an observation on 08/14/23 at 12:40 PM of the lunch, chicken fajitas, Spanish rice, mashed potatoes, green beans, and an oatmeal raisin cookie were served to the residents. During record review of a facility pureed menu (lunch meal) dated 08/14/23…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-08-16 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
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 food that was palatable and served at an appetizing temperature for 3 of 10 residents (Resident's #10, Resident # 21, and Resident # 46) reviewed for palatable food. The facility failed to provide palatable food served at an appetizing temperature or taste to Resident #10, Resident #21, and Resident #46 who complained the food was served cold and did not taste good. This failure could place residents who ate food from the kitchen at risk of weight loss, altered nutritional status, and diminished quality of life. The findings included: During an interview on 08/14/23 at 10:28 AM, Resident #10 stated the food was bland and cold. During an interview on 08/14/23 at 11:01 AM, Resident #21 stated the food was awful: Resident #21 stated the food was overcooked, cold, tasted bad and the meat was crunchy. During an interview on 08/14/23 at 11:17 AM, Resident #46 stated the food tasted bad. Resident #46 stated it just did not taste good and was cold when it gets here. During an observation and 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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-08-16 · tag F0868 — patternHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain a quality assessment and assurance committee consisting at a minimum the required committee members for 7 of 8 meetings (January 2023, February 2023, March 2023, April 2023, May 2023, June 2023, July 2023, and August 2023) reviewed for QAPI. The facility did not ensure the DON attended their QAPI meeting in August 2023. The facility did not ensure the Infection Preventionist attended their QAPI meetings in March 2023 and April 2023. The facility did not ensure the Medical Director attended their QAPI meetings in January 2023, February 2023, April 2023, June 2023, and July 2023. This failure could place residents at risk for quality deficiencies being unidentified, no appropriate plans of action developed and implemented, and no appropriate guidance developed. Findings include: 1.Record review of the facility's QAPI Committee sign-in-sheets indicated the following: 2.The DON did not sign in for their meetings in August 2023. 3.The sign-in-sheets did not indicate the Infection Preventionist did not sign in for their…
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 · E2023-08-16 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program to keep the facility free from pests in 1 of 1 dining room, 1 of 1 kitchen for pest control. The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to ensure the facility was free of flies. This failure could place residents at risk for an unsanitary environment and a decreased quality of life. Findings included: During an observation on 08/14/23 starting at 09:35 a.m., multiple flies were observed in the kitchen area. During an observation on 08/14/23 at 11:30 AM, the Dietary Manager was swatting away multiple flies in the kitchen while doing food temperatures. During an observation of the lunch meal on 08/14/23 at 11:50 AM, multiple flies observed in the dining area while the residents were eating their meals. During an observation of the lunch meal on 08/15/23 at 12:15 PM, several residents and staff swatting away multiple flies with their hands in the dining room area. During an interview on 08/16/23 at 11:10 AM, the Maintenance Director said he had…
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 · D2023-08-16 · tag F0636 — isolatedAssess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
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 complete a comprehensive resident-centered assessment of each resident's cognitive, medical, and functional capacity in a timely manner for 1 of 13 residents (Resident #14) reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The facility failed to complete Resident #14's admission MDS assessment within 14 days of admission. This failure could place residents at risk of not having their needs met. Findings included: Record review of a face sheet dated 08/14/2023 indicated Resident #14 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (chronic inflammatory lung disease that causes obstructed airflow from the lungs), Type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy (chronic condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar with nerve damage caused by high blood sugars), and bipolar disorder, current episode depressed, severe, without psychotic features (a disorder associated…
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 · D2023-08-16 · 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 ensure individuals with mental health disorders were provided an accurate Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Screenings for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #14) reviewed for PASRR. The facility failed to ensure Resident #14's PASRR Level 1 Screening indicated a diagnosis of mental illness. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving needed assessments (PASRR Evaluation), individualized care, and specialized services to meet their needs. Findings included: Record review of a face sheet dated 08/14/2023 indicated Resident #14 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (chronic inflammatory lung disease that causes obstructed airflow from the lungs), Type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy (chronic condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar with nerve damage caused by high blood sugars), and bipolar 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 before2023-08-16 · 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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to develop or implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan to meet resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 13 residents reviewed for care plans. (Resident #6) The facility did not develop or implement a comprehensive care plan to address Resident #6's diagnosis of PTSD (mental health condition that develops following a traumatic event characterized by intrusive thoughts about the incident, recurrent distress/anxiety, flashback, and avoidance of similar situations) and history of trauma. This failure could place residents at risk for inaccurate care plans and decreased quality of care. The findings included: Record review of the face sheet, dated 08/16/23, revealed Resident #6 was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility initially on 12/24/20 with diagnoses of PTSD (mental health condition that develops following a traumatic event characterized by…
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 · D2023-08-16 · 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, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure necessary services to maintain personal hygiene were provided for 1 of 47 residents reviewed for ADLs. (Resident #11). The facility did not ensure Resident #11 received fingernail care. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving services or care, decreased quality of life, and decreased self-esteem. The findings included: Record review of the face sheet, dated on 8/16/23, indicated that Resident #11 was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on initial admission dated 1/18/23, with a diagnosis of Parkinson's Disease (brain disorder that causes unintended or uncontrollable movements), Type 2 Diabetes mellitus (chronic condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar), Lack of coordination (disorder that affects body movements),and Polyarthritis (disorder that causes pain, stiffness or swelling in the joints). Record Review of Resident #11 MDS assessment, dated 6/20/23 indicated 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 · Dcited before2023-08-16 · 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 2 residents' (Resident #6) reviewed for trauma-informed care. The facility did not ensure Resident #6 had an accurate trauma screen that identified possible triggers when Resident #6 had a diagnosis of PTSD (mental health condition that develops following a traumatic event characterized by intrusive thoughts about the incident, recurrent distress/anxiety, flashback, and avoidance of similar situations). This failure could put residents at an increased risk for psychological distress due to re-traumatization. The findings included: Record review of the face sheet, dated 08/16/23, revealed Resident #6 was a [AGE] year-old male who…
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 · D2023-08-16 · 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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident, for 2 of 6 residents (Resident #43, #45) reviewed for medication administration. 1. The facility did not ensure Resident #43 rinsed and spit after administration of an inhalation medication (Breo Elipta) for a diagnosis of COPD. 2. Resident #43 was not given a multivitamin tablet as prescribed by the physician. 3. Resident #45 was not given senna 8.6mg (laxative) as prescribed by the physician. This failure could place residents at an increased risk for inaccurate drug administration and not receiving the care and services to meet their individual needs. The findings included: 1. Record review of the face sheet, dated 08/16/23, revealed Resident #43 was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis COPD - chronic…
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 before2023-08-16 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
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 a medication error rate of less than 5 percent. There were 3 errors out of 25 opportunities, resulting in a 12 percent medication error rate for 2 of 6 residents reviewed for medication error. (Resident #43, Resident #45) The facility failed to ensure the following: 1. Resident #43 rinsed and spit after administration of an inhalation medication (Breo Elipta). 2. Resident #43 was given a multivitamin tablet as prescribed by the physician. 3. Resident #45 was given senna 8.6mg (laxative) as prescribed by the physician. These failures could place residents at risk for inaccurate drug administration. The findings included: 1. During an observation on 8/15/23 at 8:45 AM, LVN E was preparing Resident #43's medication for administration. LVN E obtained a bottle of multivitamin with minerals and placed one, round, pale pink tablet in the cup. LVN E finished preparing the remainder of Resident #43's morning medication, which included the Breo Ellipta aerosol inhaler. LVN E obtained a plastic glass of water 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 · D2023-08-09 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
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 implement written policies that prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation for 2 of 4 (Resident #1 and Resident #2) residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility failed to implement the abuse and neglect policy and procedure regarding reporting resident-to-resident altercation. This failure could place the residents at increased risk for abuse and neglect. The findings included: Record Review of the Policy and Procedures for Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation dated 2/01/2021 indicated that (A) Each covered individual shall report to the State Agency and one or more law enforcement entities for the political subdivision in which the facility is located any responsible suspicion of a crime against an individual who is a resident of or is receiving care from the facility (B) Each covered, individual shall report immediately, but not later than 2 hours after forming the suspicion, if the events that cause the suspicion result in serious…
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 · D2023-08-09 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
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 that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, are reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury, to the administrator of the facility and to other officials (including to the State Survey Agency and adult protective services where state law provides for jurisdiction in long-term care facilities) in accordance with State law through established procedures for 2 of 4 (Resident #1 and Resident #2) residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility failed to report to the state agency within 24 hours of being notified of resident to resident altercation for Resident #1 and resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all drugs were stored in a locked compartment and only accessible by authorized personnel for 1 of 1 (Resident #3) residents reviewed for medication storage. 1. The facility failed to keep medication being administered under the direct observation of the person administering medications. Resident #3 had a medication cup with 4 tablets and 1 capsule sitting on top of her dresser. This failure could place residents at risk for health complications and not receiving the intended therapeutic benefit of their medication. Findings included: During an observation on 8/8/2023 at 10:20 AM revealed Resident #3 had a clear plastic medication cup with 4 tablets and 1 capsule sitting by a clear plastic cup of water on top of her dresser. Resident #3 stated the medication belonged to her roommate however, records indicated resident # 3 didn't have a roommate. Record review of face sheet, dated 10/12/2022, revealed Resident #3 was an [AGE]…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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 ADVANCED HEALTHCARE SOLUTIONS — 28 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 | 2.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.8 | +0.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.0 | +1.0 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.0 | ≈ chain avg |
The other 27 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, 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 | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| FAULKNER, GARREL | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | since 03/01/2023 |
| HOOPER, GRADY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 03/01/2023 |
| CLARKSVILLE HC LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 03/01/2023 |
| SCHEINER, ELIEZER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 03/01/2023 |
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.
About 77% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. 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 455985. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-10, 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.