Focused Care At Clarksville
2407 West Main St., Clarksville, TX 75426 · For profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (903) 427-3821 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (33% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0602) — most recent May 2025
- it has 1 actual-harm citation
- a high number of inspection citations overall (32) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $5,211 in federal fines (most recent 2024-10-05)
- 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 | 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 | 4 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 | 20.3% | 15.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.6% | 3.0% | 5.4% | better |
| 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 | 2.0% | 0.8% | 2.0% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.5% | 2.4% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.4% | 3.3% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 13.4% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 25.0% | 18.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.7% | 3.8% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 11.2% | 13.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 5.9% | 9.6% | 17.1% | better |
| 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 |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.11 | 2.17 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.15 | 2.06 | 1.80 | better |
‡ 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.
43.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 52 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 67% 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 | 43.2%CMS range 28.1–53.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.6%CMS range 6.5–16.1 | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 8.3% | 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 | 9.2%CMS range 5.7–14.7 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.08 | 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 120 beds and averages 55.1 residents a day — about 46% occupied, or roughly 65 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 2.80 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.45 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 2.42 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.95 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.46 to 0.43 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 33% is below 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.
32 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 21 are one tap away and print in full.
- Actual harm · G2024-10-05 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
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 protect a resident's right to be free from abuse for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to protect Resident #1 from inappropriate sexual touching by Resident #2. This failure could place residents at risk of for psychosocial harm and a diminished quality of life. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 10/04/24 indicated she was an [AGE] year-old female who re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of dementia (loss of cognitive functioning), cognitive communication deficit (result in difficulty with thinking and how someone uses language), diabetes (a chronic condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar), major depressive disorder (mental illness that negatively affects how you feel, the way you think and how you act), high blood pressure, and facture of her left arm. Record review of Resident #1's quarterly 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 · Ecited before2026-02-25 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for 3 of 15 residents (Residents #7, #8 and #36) reviewed for accuracy of assessments. 1. The facility failed to accurately complete the MDS assessment to indicate Resident #7's PASRR status was positive. 2. The facility failed to accurately complete the MDS assessment to indicate Resident #8's tobacco use.3. The facility failed to accurately complete the MDS assessment to indicate Resident #36's PASRR status was positive. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving the appropriate care and services to maintain their highest level of well-being. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #7's face sheet, dated 02/24/2026, indicated a [AGE] year-old male, admitted [DATE] and readmitted [DATE]. Resident #7 had diagnoses which included anxiety and major depressive disorder. Record review of Resident #7's physician orders, dated 02/2026, indicated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-25 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 1 medication rooms and 1 of 2 medication carts for 4 of 18 residents reviewed for pharmacy services (Resident #8, #42, #43 and #52). 1. The facility failed to perform an inventory of controlled substances of the medication cart upon transfer of keys between staff.2. The facility failed to ensure expired mediations were removed from all medication carts and medication rooms.These failures could place residents at increase risks of drug diversion and of receiving medications that were not at their intended potency and potential adverse reactions or side effects. 1. During an observation on 02/23/2026 at 09:05 a.m., MA B was observed rolling the medication cart into the medication room. MA B then informed LVN A she had a family emergency 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 · Ecited before2026-02-25 · 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 2 of 2 residents observed for incontinent care (Residents #5 and #32), for 1 of 1 resident observed for wound care (Resident #5), and 1 of 1 resident for transfers (Resident #32). * CNA F and CNA G used gloves pulled from their pockets, CNA G touched clean items without hand hygiene between glove changes, CNA F did not do hand hygiene between glove changes, and CNA G did not wash her hands before leaving the room when they provided incontinent care and Hoyer lift transfer on Resident #32. * CNA F used gloves pulled from her pocket, LVN C used gloves pulled from CNA F's pocket, and when cleaning the wound LVN C did not do hand hygiene between glove changes when they provided incontinent care and wound care to 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 before2026-02-25 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs and describes the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 20 residents (Resident #36) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #36's care plan addressed his PASRR positive status. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving appropriate interventions to meet their current needs. Findings included:Record review of a face sheet dated 02/24/26 indicated Resident #36 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. His diagnoses included schizophrenia (a mental disorder characterized variously by hallucinations (typically, hearing voices), delusions, disorganized thinking and behavior, and flat or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-25 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — isolatedEnsure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident's drug regimen was free from unnecessary medications (is a medication used: for excessive duration) for 2 of 5 residents (Residents #5 and #32) reviewed for unnecessary medications. * The facility did not have a stop date for Resident #5's Methenamine Hippurate (antibiotic) * The facility did not have a stop date for Resident #32's Bactrim DS (antibiotic) These failures could place residents at risk for antibiotic resistance infections due to excessive use of antibiotics. Findings included:1. Record review of a face sheet dated 02/25/26 indicated Resident #5 was a [AGE] year-old male readmitted on [DATE]. His diagnoses included malignant neoplasm (uncontrolled growth of cells) of the prostate (a gland in the male reproductive system) and paraplegia (injury to the spinal cord or brain that stops signals from reaching the lower body). Record review of February 2026 physician orders for Resident #5 indicated he had an order dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-02-25 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — isolatedKeep all essential equipment working safely.
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 all mechanical, electrical, and patient care equipment in safe operating condition for 1 of 1 stove in the kitchen reviewed for essential equipment. * The facility did not ensure the gas stove was in safe operating condition. The two right burners would not ignite when the knobs were turned. This failure could place the residents at risk of a fire for not having safe operating equipment. Findings included:During an observation and interview on 02/23/2026 at 08:53 a.m. the stove's two right burners were not lighting when the knobs turned on. Observation indicated the pilot lights to the two burners were not lit. The DM said they had to be lit with a long lighter. The DM said the stove should light without using a lighter. He said having to light the stove with a lighter could cause an explosion possibly causing injuries to residents. Observation indicated there was no hissing sound of gas and no foul smell of gas coming from the burners. During an interview on 02/24/26 at 11:05 a.m. the DM said the MD…
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 before2025-05-21 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — patternProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
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 Misappropriation of Resident Property for 6 of 18 residents (Resident #'s 1,2,3,4,5, and 6). 1.The facility failed to prevent the misappropriation of bottle of megace (Resident #1) and (Resident #4), card of Zofran (Resident #5) and (Resident #3), card of Pantoprazole (Resident #6), card of montelukast (no legible name), Nystatin, Xyzal (no legible name), card of Flexeril (no legible name), (CMA H) removed the medication from the nurses' cart, without authorization, for personal gain. 2. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #2 was not subject to financial misappropriation or exploitation from Housekeeper A from the time period 2/11/2025 to 2/17/2025. Housekeeper A accepted cash in the amount of $60 from Resident #2. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The past noncompliance began on 2/11/25 and ended on 4/4/25. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the investigation began. This…
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 before2024-12-04 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 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 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for dietary services, and in that: 1) The facility failed to date all food items. 2) Dietary staff failed to dispose of expired foods items 3)The facility failed to ensure proper infection control measures when a resident self-served ice from the ice chest cooler located on Hall 2 on 12/2/2024, 12/03/2024 and 12/04/2024. These failures could place residents at risk for food contamination and foodborne illness. The findings included: During observation in the kitchen Refrigerator 1 of 3 on 12/2/24 at 9:56 a.m., the following was observed: -(1) gallon of 2 percent milk unopened expired on 11/28/24. During observation in the kitchen Refrigerator 2 of 3 on 12/2/24 at 10:03 a.m., the following was observed: -(1) serving of hot sauce prep date of 10/31/24. (expired) During observation in the kitchen on 12/2/24…
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 before2024-12-04 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure the residents' environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #13) reviewed for accident hazards. The facility failed to ensure the cigarettes for Resident #13 were properly secured in the designated locked box behind the nurse's station. The facility failed to ensure Resident #13 was smoking with supervision when she was found outside in the smoking area on 12/04/24 smoking alone. These failures could place residents at risk for injuries. Findings included: Record review of Resident #13's face sheet dated 12/4/24 indicated she was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses hemiplegia following a cerebral infarction (a stroke that causes one sided weakness or paralysis), diabetes mellitus (disease in which the body has difficulty controlling the blood sugar), depression, high blood pressure, and lack of coordination. Record review of Resident #13's…
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 before2024-12-04 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments under proper temperature controls and permit only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for 1 of 19 residents reviewed for medication storage. (Resident #14). The facility failed to ensure Resident #14's vagisil maximum strength cream (used for vaginal itching), preparation H hemorrhoidal ointment (used for relief of swelling, burning, or pain from hemorrhoids), Asper creme lidocaine roll on (used for pain), fluticasone 50mcg nasal spray (used for allergies), and 2 bottles of Systane eye drops were stored and locked in an area not accessible to unauthorized staff, residents, or visitors. These failures could place residents at risk of injury. Findings included: Record review of Resident #14's face sheet dated 12/04/24 indicated she was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses high blood pressure, arthritis, seasonal allergies, 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.
Show the remaining 21 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-12-04 · 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 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 1 of 3 residents (Residents #17). 1.CNA A and CNA B failed to use enhanced barrier precautions by donning a gown when performing foley care on Resident #17 on 12/03/2024. 2.CNA A and CNA B failed to change their gloves after performing foley care on Resident #17 and touched the resident and clean surfaces on 12/03/2024. These failures could place residents at risk of exposure to communicable diseases, cross-contamination and infections. Findings included: Record review of the face sheet, dated 12/04/2024, revealed Resident #17 was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Parkinson disease (a disorder of the central nervous system that affects movements, often including…
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 · D2024-12-04 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolatedMake 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, staff, and the public, for 1 of 19 residents (Resident #14) reviewed for physical environment. The facility failed to ensure Resident #14's bathroom toilet was functioning properly. The facility failed to ensure Resident #14's bathroom toilet was not briskly running or leaking water for her to use safely. This failure could place residents at-risk of falls and further injuries due to an unsafe environment. The findings were: Record review of Resident #14's face sheet dated 12/04/24 indicated she was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses high blood pressure, arthritis, seasonal allergies, and abnormal posture. Record review of Resident #14's admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated she was able to make herself understood and able to understand others. The MDS also indicated she had a BIMS score of 14 which…
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 before2024-11-21 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolatedProtect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
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 right to be free from misappropriation of resident property for 1 of 3 (Resident # 1) residents reviewed for misappropriation of resident property. The facility failed to prevent a drug diversion (misappropriation) of Resident #1's-controlled medications on [DATE], Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen 7.5-325MG (narcotic pain reliever), Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen10-325MG, and Lorazepam (controlled anti-anxiety medication) 0.5 MG, after she expired on [DATE]. The medications were not found. The non-compliance was identified as past non-compliance. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place residents at risk for decreased quality of life, misappropriation of property, misappropriation of physician ordered medications and dignity. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated [DATE] indicated she was a [AGE] year-old female who originally 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 · Fcited before2023-11-02 · 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 in the facility's only kitchen The facility failed to ensure that kitchen staff appropriately restrained their hair with the hairnet. The facility failed to ensure cans were free from damage. These failures could place residents at risk of cross contamination and foodborne illness. Findings included: 1. During an observation on 10/30/2023 starting at 09:03 AM revealed: two dented cans of Campbell's Cream of Mushroom Soup in the kitchen pantry. the [NAME] was not wearing the hairnet appropriately to restrain the sides and back of hair. the Dishwasher was not wearing the hairnet appropriately to contain facial hair, approximately one half inch mustache. During an observation on 10/30/2023 at 09:11 AM, revealed the dishwasher was in the kitchen without a hairnet on appropriately. The dishwasher was not wearing a hair net to contain facial hair approximately one half inch mustache. During an observation 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 · E2023-11-02 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — patternHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
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 right to formulate an advanced directive was provided for 3 of 20 residents (Residents #4, #16 and #24) reviewed for advanced directives. 1. The facility did not ensure Resident #4's OOH-DNR included the physician signature and physician date the document was signed. 2. The facility did not ensure Resident #16's OOH-DNR included the witness 2 signature, physician license number, and physician date the document was signed. 3. The facility did not ensure Resident #24's OOH-DNR included the witness 1 signature. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving care and services to meet their needs. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #4's face sheet, dated 11/02/2023, indicated Resident #4 was a [AGE] year-old female, readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included COPD (chronic inflammatory lung disease that causes obstructed airflow from the lungs). Record review of Resident #4's physician order…
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 before2023-11-02 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure that the resident environment remains as free of accident hazards as is possible and each resident receives adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 6 of 20 residents (Resident #8, Resident #13, Resident #19, Resident #25, Resident #47, and Resident #52) reviewed for accidents and supervision. The facility did not ensure Resident #52 smoked in the designated smoking area while being supervised during the smoke break. The facility did not ensure PTA F used the gait belt appropriately while ambulating Resident #25. The facility failed to ensure the safety of Resident #13 by not moving the Resident to another location/bed prior to removing/working on the bed. The facility failed to properly store aerosol can with a labeled Lavender Scent Deodorizer Spray leaving them on Resident #47's dresser. The facility failed to properly store 3 air freshener sprays and 1 container of disinfectant wipes leaving them…
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 · E2023-11-02 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — patternImplement 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 the medical record of each resident was accurately documented in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices for 3 of 20 residents (Residents #4, #9 and #24) reviewed for medical records. 1. The facility did not ensure Resident #4's behaviors were adequately monitored regarding her antianxiety medication. The facility did not ensure Resident #4's side effects were adequately monitored regarding her antianxiety, antidepressant and antipsychotic medications. 2. The facility did not ensure Resident #9's behaviors were adequately monitored regarding her antianxiety medication. The facility did not ensure Resident #9's side effects were adequately monitored regarding her antianxiety and antidepressant medications. 3. The facility did not ensure Resident #24's behaviors were adequately monitored regarding her antianxiety medication. The facility did not ensure Resident #24's side effects were adequately monitored regarding her…
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 · E2023-11-02 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — patternEnsure 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, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents were free of significant medication errors for 1 of 9 residents reviewed for insulin administration. (Resident #52) The facility did not ensure LVN P and RN Q administered Resident #52's Humalog (insulin lispro) KwikPen (insulin medication) according to the manufacturer's instructions. This failure could place the resident at risk of medical complications and not receiving the therapeutic effects of their medications. The findings included: Record review of the face sheet, dated 10/31/23, revealed Resident #52 was a [AGE] year-old female who initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of type 2 diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia (high blood sugar), and mild cognitive impairment of uncertain or unknown etiology (characterized by problems with language, memory and thinking). Record review of the MDS assessment, dated 10/10/23, revealed Resident #52 had clear speech and was understood by staff. The MDS…
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 before2023-11-02 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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 that all drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled and stored in accordance with professional standards for 3 of 20 residents (Resident #8, Resident #9, and Resident #40) and 1 of 1 empty resident's room reviewed for drugs and biologicals. The facility failed to ensure Resident #8's Afrin (nasal spray medication) was stored properly. The facility failed to ensure Resident #40's Azelastine (nasal spray medication) was stored properly. The facility did not ensure a Plavix pill (antiplatelet) was stored in a locked container and original packaging. The facility did not ensure Resident #9's multivitamins, ear drops, and triple antibiotic ointment were properly safe and secured. These failures could place residents at risk of medication misuse and diversion. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #8's face sheet dated 11/07/2023 indicated she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with…
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 · E2023-11-02 · 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 1 of 1 lunch meal reviewed for palatability and temperature. The facility failed to provide palatable food served at an appetizing temperature or taste to Resident #41, Resident #28, and Resident #19 who complained the food was served cold and did not taste good. The facility failed to ensure the Dietary Manager followed the recipe for pureeing the Swiss steak and California Blend Vegetables (the lunch menu). 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: 1. During an interview on 10/30/2023 beginning at 9:25 AM, Resident #41 stated the food was cold and bland at times. During an interview on 10/30/2023 at 4:11 PM, Resident #28 said sometimes the food smelled like dogfood, and she could not eat it. She stated the food was cold. During an interview on 10/30/2023 at 1:07 PM, Resident #19 said the food was bland 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 · E2023-11-02 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — patternEnsure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
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 each resident received and the facility provided at least three meals daily, at regular times comparable to normal mealtimes in the community or in accordance with resident needs, preferences, requests and plan of care for 2 of 2 meals (Lunch on 10/30/2023 AND 10/31/2023) observed for frequency of meals. The facility failed to serve the 10/30/2023 and 10/31/2023 lunch meal on time at the scheduled time. This failure could place residents at risk for decreased meal satisfaction, decreased intake, loss of appetite, side effects from medication given without food, and diminished quality of life. The findings include: Record review of the facility's mealtimes indicated breakfast at 7:15 AM, Lunch at 12:00 PM, and Supper 5:15 PM. During an observation on 10/30/2023 at 12:42 PM, revealed the residents in the dining room were served lunch. During an observation on 10/31/2023 at 12:48 PM, revealed the residents on 600 hall were served lunch. During an interview on 10/31/2023 at 12:42 PM, Resident #42 said lunch…
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 before2023-11-02 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #28) and 4 of 4 staff (CNA G, CNA H, Community Cleanliness Provider O and Clinical Reimbursement Coordinator) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA G and CNA H changed gloves and performed hand hygiene while providing incontinent care to Resident #28. The facility failed to ensure CNA G and CNA H did not touch the multi-use wipes container with their dirty gloves. 2. The facility failed to ensure the Clinical Reimbursement Coordinator sanitized her hands between each resident meal tray while passing meal trays on Hall 1. 3. The facility did not ensure Community Cleanliness Provider O kept the personal linen cart covered. These failures could place residents and staff at risk for cross-contamination and the spread of infection. Findings…
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 · E2023-11-02 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to promote antibiotic stewardship by ensuring the appropriate use of antibiotic therapy and providing written rationale, by the provider, when an antibiotic was used despite criteria, to determine the appropriate the use of an antibiotic for 3 of 3 residents (Residents #13, #36, and #44) reviewed for antibiotic use. The facility failed to ensure Residents #13, #36, and #44 had documented signs and symptoms, appropriate lab work, and diagnoses to support the use of prescribed antibiotics. This failure could place residents receiving antibiotics at risk for unnecessary antibiotic use, inappropriate antibiotic use, and increased antibiotic-resistant infections. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #13's face sheet, dated 11/01/2023, revealed an [AGE] year-old female initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Quadriplegia (paralysis of all 4 limbs), Muscle Wasting,…
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 · E2023-11-02 · tag F0926 — failed to keep the home smoke-free / fire-safe — patternHave policies on smoking.
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 follow their own established smoking policy for the facility's only smoking area and 1 of 12 residents (Resident #52) reviewed for smoking policies. 1. The facility did not ensure Resident #52 smoked in the designated smoking area with appropriate supervision. 2. The facility did not ensure cigarette butts were disposed of in metal containers in the smoking area. 3. The facility did not ensure plastic trash was placed in the appropriate trash containers in the smoking area. These failures could place residents at risk of an unsafe smoking environment. The findings included: Record review of the face sheet, dated 10/31/23, revealed Resident #52 was a [AGE] year-old female who initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of sepsis, unspecified organism (infection of the blood stream resulting in a cluster of symptoms such as drop in a blood pressure, increase in heart rate and fever), COPD (common, preventable and treatable…
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 · D2023-11-02 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and provide care in a manner that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #25 and Resident #159) reviewed for resident rights. 1. The facility did not ensure CNA B knocked, introduced herself, and explained the procedure prior to entering Resident #25's room and providing care. 2. The facility did not ensure CNA B knocked prior to entering Resident #159's room. The findings included: 1. Record review of the face sheet, dated 11/01/2023, revealed Resident #25 was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of type 2 diabetes mellitus with moderate nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy with macular edema (complication of high blood sugar where blood vessels in the eye are damaged causing swelling), legal blindness (unable to see), unsteadiness of feet, difficulty in walking, ataxia (loss of coordination 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 · D2023-11-02 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences for 1 of 20 residents (Resident #10) reviewed for reasonable accommodation of needs. The facility did not ensure Resident #10's call light was within reach. This failure could place residents at risk for unmet needs and decreased quality of life. The findings included: Record review of the face sheet, dated 11/01/23, revealed Resident #10 was an [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of muscle weakness, lack of coordination, heart failure (progressive heart disease that affects pumping action of the heart muscles), cerebrovascular disease (umbrella term for conditions that impact the blood vessels in your brain), and chronic kidney disease, stage 3 (kidneys are damaged, but they still work well enough that you do not need dialysis or a kidney transplant; Kidney…
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 · D2023-11-02 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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 1 of 20 residents (Resident #28) reviewed for environment. The facility failed to ensure Resident #28's door was properly functioning. This failure could place residents at risk for an uncomfortable, unhomelike environment, and a diminished quality of life. Findings included: Record review of a face sheet dated 11/02/2023 indicated Resident #28 was a [AGE] year-old female initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side (weakness and paralysis of the right side of the body following a stroke), major depressive disorder, recurrent severe without psychotic features (a serious mood disorder involving one or more episodes of intense psychological depression or loss of interest or pleasure that lasts two or more weeks), and type 2 diabetes…
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 before2023-11-02 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure an accurate MDS was completed for 1 of 20 residents (Resident's #14) reviewed for MDS assessment accuracy. 1. The facility did not ensure Resident #14's most recent MDS assessment reflected his hospice services during the 14-day look-back period. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving care and services to meet their needs. The findings included: Record review of the face sheet, dated 10/31/23, revealed Resident #14 was a [AGE] year-old male who initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of unspecified dementia without behavioral disturbance (group of symptoms that affects memory, thinking and interferes with daily life), alcoholic liver disease (spectrum of alcohol-induced liver dysfunction ranging from mild, reversible fatty liver to irreversible liver fibrosis and cirrhosis), and type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications (high blood sugar). Record review of the MDS assessment, dated 09/15/2023,…
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 before2023-11-02 · 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 2 of 20 residents reviewed for care plans. (Resident #5 and Resident #13) 1. The facility did not implement Resident #5's care plan or accurately reflect her diet preferences. 2. The facility failed to develop and implement a care plan for Resident #13's Hospice care services. These failures could place residents at risk of not having individual needs met and a decreased quality of life. The findings included: 1. Record review of the face sheet, dated 11/01/2023, revealed Resident #5 was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of metabolic encephalopathy (happens when another health condition, such as diabetes, liver disease, kidney failure, or heart failure, makes it hard for the brain to work), COPD…
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 · D2023-11-02 · 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 grooming and personal hygiene were provided for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for ADLs. (Resident #41 and Resident #210) 1. The facility did not ensure Resident #41 received nail care. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #210 received his shower as scheduled. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving services or care, decreased quality of life, and decreased self-esteem. The findings included: 1. Record review of the face sheet, dated 11/01/2023, revealed Resident #41 was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of acute on chronic congestive heart failure (progressive heart disease that affects pumping action of the heart muscles), essential hypertension (high blood pressure), and type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy (high blood sugar with numbness in hands and feet). Record review of the MDS assessment, dated 09/29/2023, revealed…
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 before2023-11-02 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services, including procedures that assure the accurate dispensing and administering of all drugs and biologicals to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 20 residents (Residents #28) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #28 received insulin as prescribed. The facility failed to ensure Resident #28's blood sugar was rechecked in an hour. These failures could place residents at risk for hospitalizations, not receiving services to meet their needs, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included: Record review of a face sheet dated 11/02/2023 indicated Resident #28 was a [AGE] year-old female initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side (weakness and paralysis of the right side of the body following a stroke), major depressive disorder, recurrent…
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
$5,211 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $5,211 — penalty dated 2024-10-05
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to FOCUSED POST ACUTE CARE PARTNERS — 25 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 | 1.9 | +1.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.1 | +0.9 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 1.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.0 | ≈ chain avg |
The other 24 homes this chain runs (chain average 1.9★, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| CHAMBERS COUNTY PUBLIC HOSPITAL DISTRICT NO. 1 | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 05/01/2021 |
| ABERNATHY, MARY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 05/01/2024 |
| HUMPHREY, ERIC | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 05/01/2024 |
| LEGG, STEPHEN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 01/01/2024 |
| MCKENZIE, MARK | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
| TINNERMAN, LINDA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 12/15/2020 |
| TURNER, LESLIE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 01/01/2024 |
| COOPER, KIMBERLY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 01/29/2024 |
| FOCUSED POST ACUTE CARE PARTNERS LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
| FOCUSED POST ACUTE CARE PARTNERS MANAGEMENT, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
| FPACP CLARKSVILLE LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
| BROWN, RUTH | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
| CASTLE, LISA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/27/2023 |
| CONLEY, SHAWN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
| MUTHAPPA, DEEPAK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
| NEWTON, ELIZABETH | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 02/22/2024 |
| STRUBBE, LORETTA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2021 |
| WEISELOGEL, MELISA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/18/2021 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 31 rows in the source record cover these 18 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
4 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.
About 79% 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. This home reported $210K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. 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, FY2023). 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 455944. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-25, 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.