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

Sunset Home

1800 W 9th Street, Clifton, TX 76634 · Government - Hospital district · 128 certified beds · (254) 675-8637 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
1 immediate-jeopardy citation$14,020 in federal fines1 Medicare payment denial
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
Worth asking about
  • inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
  • the CMS record shows $14,020 in federal fines (most recent 2025-03-26)
  • 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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
201 N Avenue T · (254) 675-1271 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
210 Posey Ave · (254) 675-8659 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Davids0.8 mi
614 S Avenue G · (254) 675-3465 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Riverside Dr · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 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.

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased14.9%15.8%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight2.9%3.0%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.3%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.4%0.8%2.0%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms2.5%2.4%6.5%typical for the state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.9%3.3%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened18.5%14.0%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication17.2%18.0%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine99.1%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.2%3.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control19.1%13.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table12.9%9.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.3%1.5%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine96.1%88.0%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission20.6%25.7%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit18.9%12.3%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.172.171.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.592.061.80worse

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.

45.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 44 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

45.6%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
55.7%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.39U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.20hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.14hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 55.7% 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 88 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 0.39 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 68% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF45.6%CMS range 35.2–57.351.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.8%CMS range 6.5–16.310.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge55.7%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge61.4%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge52.3%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified97.1%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot 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 discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.9%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.9%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.2%CMS range 3.5–11.87.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.841.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.34
RN hours/ resident / day
0.64
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.67
Aide hours/ resident / day
2.65
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.29
RN hoursweekends
37.2%
Total nursing turnover
14.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 128 beds and averages 121.5 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 2.65 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.34 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.67 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 2.28 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.80 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.36 to 0.29 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 37% 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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-05-29)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-04-11)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2025-03-26 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents environment remained as free of accident hazards as is possible and ensured each resident received adequate supervision for one (Resident #1) of four residents reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was free from accidents. Resident #1 eloped from the facility on 3/20/25, was able to obtain access to a truck at a private residence near the facility. Resident #1 was involved in an accident and was transported to the ER on [DATE]. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 checked out when leaving the facility and was monitored to ensure he returned. The process to get back in the facility after 10:00 PM (when the doors were locked) required him to have a phone to call the nurses station to be let in, Resident #1 did not have a phone. This failure resulted in an identification of an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on 03/25/25 at 4:24 PM and an IJ template was provided. While the IJ was…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-05-29 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for one of one kitchen reviewed for sanitation. The facility failed to dispose of perishable foods in the dry storage pantry and walk in fridge. These failures could place residents at risk for consuming hazardous expired food and developing foodborne illnesses who received food from the kitchen. Findings Included: Observation in the kitchen on 05/27/25 at 9:36 am revealed a bag of white bread with the use by date of 02/26/25. Observation on 05/27/25 in the kitchen at 9:36 am revealed a bag of tortillas with the use by date of 04/18/25. Observation on 05/27/25 in the kitchen at 9:36 am revealed a bag of buns with the use by date of 05/07/25. Observation on 05/27/25 in the kitchen at 9:36 am revealed a tray of four mayo bottles all marked with the expiration date of 04/29/25. In an interview with [NAME] E on 05/29/25 at 1:22 pm she revealed that she had been trained on what to do with expired foods.…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-05-29 · tag F0700 — pattern
    Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
    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 use appropriate alternatives prior to installing a side or bed rails, assess the resident for risk of entrapment, review the risk and benefits, and obtain informed consent prior to installation for 3 out of 15 residents (Residents #63, #80, and #100) reviewed for bedrails. The facility failed to assess and get signed consents for Residents #63, #80, and #100 prior to installing bed rails. This deficient practice could affect residents who utilized bed rails by placing them at risk for unintended entrapment of the head, neck, or limbs, restraints, and injuries. The findings included: Record review of Resident #63's face sheet dated 05/29/25 reflected a 72 -year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with relevant diagnoses of dementia, cellulitis (major infection of the skin), cognitive communication deficit (a generalized inability to understand and communicate due to disease state), anxiety and insomnia (inability to sleep…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-29 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure each resident was treated with respect, dignity, and care for 1 of 15 residents (Resident #80) observed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure Resident #80 was served her meal and provided assistance to eat at the same time as the other residents. The facility failed to ensure that they were engaging Resident #80 while assisting her with lunch. This failure could place residents at risk of lowered self-esteem, depression, and frustration. Findings included Record review of Resident #80's face sheet dated 05/29/25 reflected a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Dementia (chronic brain degeneration), Edema (excessive fluid retention around parts of the body), pulmonary embolism (lung clots), Epileptic seizures, and Cognitive communication deficit (a generalized inability to understand and communicate due to disease state). Record review of Resident #80's quarterly MDS 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-29 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that all drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with professional standards, including expiration dates for 1 of 4 medication carts reviewed. During observation of MC A, Resident #16's Artificial Tears had an expiration date of 08/2024. This failure could lead to medication not being effective, and therefore impacting resident health. Findings included: Record review of Resident #16's undated face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #16 had diagnoses which included chronic kidney disease, hypertensive heart failure, need for assistance with personal care, anxiety disorder, dry eye syndrome unspecified lacrimal gland (dryness of the cornea and conjunctiva caused by a deficiency in tear production), and xeroderma of left upper eyelid (excessively dry skin). Record review of Resident #16's Prescription Order reflected she had been prescribed Natural…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-04-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on 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. The facility failed to properly seal, label, and date food products in dry storage and the walk-in freezer. These failures placed residents at risk of exposure food contamination and food-borne illness. Findings included: Observation on 4/9/2024 at 9:00 AM in the kitchen's dry storage room reflected 6 individual 6-pound cans of pineapple with dented sides and dented seams. The cans were observed in the canned food rack with the entirety of the remaining canned good items; 1 item of vanilla wafers removed from its original container and stored in an unsealed plastic bag, without a date to signify when the item was removed from its original package or when the item was supposed to expire; 1 item of granola cereal removed from its original container and stored in a plastic bag, without a date to signify when the item was removed from its original package 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-04-11 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 of 6 residents (Resident # 80) reviewed for resident assessments. The facility failed to ensure Resident #80's medication assessment for high-risk drug classes reflected Resident #80 took antiplatelet medication. This failure could place residents at-risk for inadequate care due to inaccurate assessments. Findings include: A record review of Resident #80's face sheet, dated 04/11/2024, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to facility on 01/17/2024. Resident #80's diagnoses included other heart failure (a condition that occurs when the heart muscle does not pump blood as well as it should), type 2 diabetes (a condition that happens because of a problem in the way the body regulates and uses sugar as a fuel) and hypertension (High blood Pressure). A record review of Resident #80's admission MDS dated [DATE] reflected Resident #80 had a BIMS score of 09 indicating moderately…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-04-11 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for one resident (Resident #3) of six reviewed. A) The facility failed to ensure Resident #3's Comprehensive Care Plan reflected her risk for skin breakdown and a stage 2 pressure ulcer to the right upper buttocks. This failure could place a resident at risk for errors in provider care, poor wound healing/worsening wound/skin conditions. Findings included: Review of Resident #3's undated face sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: essential hypertension (elevated blood pressure), unspecified fracture of the left hip, hematuria (blood in the urine), and diarrhea. Review of Resident #3's weekly nursing assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #3 had completely limited mobility to her upper and lower extremities. Resident #3 required a wheelchair for mobility. Resident #3 did have pressure relieving devices in use for her chair and bed.…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-11-22 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for one of one kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation The facility failed to ensure food was stored properly in the walk-in freezer and walk-in refrigerator. There was food that had been expired and food that had not been labled or dated. The deficient practice placed residents who were served from the kitchen at risk for health complications and foodborne illnesses. Findings include: Observations on 11/22/2023 at 9:20 am of poster titled FIRST IN FIRST OUT posted on the outside of the walk in refrigerator informing the staff to label food the day food was received and when it should be used. Store food so labels are clearly visible and use products expiring first. Check food expiration dates and throw away at or before expiration. During an observation of the walk-in freezer on 11/22/2023 at 9:23 am multiple boxes of food were observed laying on the floor including an opened box of hamburger meat, pies, French fries,…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-11-22 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on 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 2 of 6 residents ( Resident #3 and #4) reviewed for infection control, in that:. LVN A failed to use a clean, unused gauze to wipe Resident #3 and #4's fingers before collecting a blood specimen for a blood sugar check. LVN A re-used a contaminated alcohol pad to wipe both Resident #3 and 4's fingers prior to taking a blood sample. This failure could result in the spread of diseases to residents which could result in decreased quality of life, illness, and hospitalization. Findings include: Review of Resident #4's face sheet dated 11/22/2023, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: Type 2 Diabetes (blood sugar regulation disorder), Hypertension (high blood pressure),…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-02-16 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — pattern
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    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. The facility failed to provide a system of medication records that enables periodic accurate reconciliation and accounting for all controlled medications for 1 of 3 medication carts that were reviewed for pharmacy services. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for not receiving the therapeutic effects from controlled narcotics due to from controlled narcotics not reconciled every shift. The findings include: 1.During an observation and record review on 2/16/23 at 11:30 a.m., an inspection of the medication cart on Hope Hall, revealed a form titled, Controlled Drugs-Count Record (Narcotic count sheet at each change of nursing shift), with missing signatures with the following dates: 2/1/23, 2/2/23, 2/3/23, and 2/4/23. During an interview on 2/16/23 at 11:30 a.m., LVA A stated she was aware of the…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-02-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    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 for one of one kitchen reviewed for food storage. The DS failed to ensure all items in the walk-in refrigerator and freezer were covered, labeled, dated, and discarded prior to their expiration date. These failures placed residents at risk of foodborne illness. Findings included: Observations on 02/13/2023 at 8:51 AM of poster titled FIRST IN FIRST OUT posted on the outside of the walk in refrigerator informing the staff to label food the day food was received and when it should be used. Store food so labels are clearly visible and use products expiring first. Check food expiration dates and throw away at or before expiration. Observations of the walk-in refrigerator on 02/13/2023 from 8:52 AM to 9:17 AM revealed the following: 1. Five heads of cabbage uncovered and undated sitting in white plastic bin. 2. One brown cardboard box, opened, uncovered, and undated, containing approximately 75 sliced…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-02-16 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that residents who needed respiratory care were provided with such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of one resident (Resident #15) reviewed for respiratory care, in that: The facility failed to: A.) Resident #15's tubing has not been changed since 1/27/23. B.) Resident #15's oxygen tubing was laying on the floor next to the Resident on 2/14/23 and 2/15/23. These deficient practices could place residents that receive oxygen therapy at risk for inadequate care and respiratory infection. Findings Included: Resident #15 Review of the facility's policy Safety Items, dated 12/9/2022 revealed, .Oxygen tubing must be changed out weekly on Oxygen concentrators and nebulizers Oxygen tubing must be bagged when not in use .Oxygen tubing must be dated with the date that it was changed. Use a piece of tape and write the date on it; place the tape on the bag . Record Review of Resident #15's face sheet 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$14,020 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

  • $14,020 — penalty dated 2025-03-26
  • Medicare payment denial — starting 2025-04-24 for 2 days

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.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
BOSQUE COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICTOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF100%since 07/01/2019
ABRIGHT, STEPHANIEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/05/2019
BENNETT, LESLIEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/06/2018
BLOSSOM, THOMASIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/22/2020
BRATCHER, NANCYIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/06/2018
CLIFTON, GEORGEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 11/26/2018
DUNBAR, JOHNIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 08/01/2023
ERICKSON, JOHNIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 11/26/2018
FERGUSON, CHARLESIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/03/2020
HEINLEY, VIRGINIAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/05/2019
HOPKINS, CHARLESIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 11/26/2018
PARKS, ROGERIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 11/26/2018
PHILLIPS, ROBERTIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/01/2023
THIELE, JOHNIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 03/25/2025
VILLARREAL, VIRGINIAIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 11/26/2018
WOLFGANG, EDIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/07/2023
WRIGHT, DONIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/01/2022
GLOFF, VICKIIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2019
HECKER, MICHAELIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/10/2006
PICKETT, JERRYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2019
RUETER, RODNEYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/03/1997
WILLMANN, ADAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2019
LUTHERAN SUNSET MINISTRIESOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2019
ALLEN, LANCEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2019
QUALLS, RUSTINIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2019
SQUYRES, JUSTINIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 07/01/2019

CMS files one row per role, so the 39 rows in the source record cover these 26 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$7.6M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-20.3%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 50%Medicare 3%Other / private 46%

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

$267per resident / day
operating cost
$8,120per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$222per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in TX

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Texas Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Texas
$5,627/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$7,604/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,666/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 675826. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-29, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next