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

Brentwood Place Four

3505 S Buckner Blvd Bldg 5, Dallas, TX 75227 · For profit - Corporation · 90 certified beds · (214) 237-3250 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (214) 237-3250 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0602) — cited Feb 2025
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)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0602), cited Feb 2025
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (30) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (65%) runs well above the national median (45%)

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) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1 Medical Pkwy · (972) 243-5437 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
10 Medical Pkwy Ste 107 · (888) 370-1724 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
3046 Forest Ln · (972) 406-8555 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Mallon Park, 2840 Millwood Dr · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1404 W Hebron Pkwy · (469) 348-6657

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 5 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 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.

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 increased5.8%15.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.2%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 infection0.0%0.8%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%2.4%6.5%check this — see note marked star 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 injury0.0%3.3%3.3%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened5.7%14.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication13.2%18.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.7%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.6%3.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control4.5%13.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table7.8%9.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.2%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine92.7%88.0%79.4%better

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

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

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

24.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 35 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

24.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
0.26U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.09hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.11hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 37% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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 SNF24.9%CMS range 12.8–43.951.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024worse than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.3%CMS range 7.1–17.210.7%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 dischargenot 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 dischargenot 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 dischargenot 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 identified100.0%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 dischargenot 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 stay0.0%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 worsened0.0%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 hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.111.02Oct 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

0.58
RN hours/ resident / day
0.63
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.98
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.19
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.28
RN hoursweekends
65.2%
Total nursing turnover
64.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 90 beds and averages 78.9 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 11 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 3.19 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.58 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.98 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 2.86 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.32 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.70 to 0.28 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 65% is well above the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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

10
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-06-11)
11
at the previous standard inspection (2024-05-10)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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.

30 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-27 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 (Residents #1) of 4 reviewed for oxygen. The facility failed to ensure Residents #1 had a written orders for oxygen administration when Resident#1 was receiving oxygen therapy on 05/27/26. This failure placed residents who received oxygen therapy at risk for inadequate or inappropriate amounts of oxygen delivery and ineffective treatment. Record review of Resident #1's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 04/02/26, revealed Resident #1 was [AGE] years old male admitted to facility on 12/29/25 and readmitted [DATE]. Resident#1 active diagnosis included: Stroke, Heart Failure, High Blood Pressure, High Blood Sugar, respiratory failure, and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (a progressive, irreversible lung disease that makes it hard to breathe.).Resident#1 had a BIMS score of 11/15 indicating moderate cognitive…

    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 · Ecited before2025-06-11 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide the necessary services for residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for 4 (Resident #16, Resident #62, Resident #194 and Resident#29) of 18 residents reviewed for ADLs. The facility failed to ensure: 1- Resident #16 had her thumb nail cleaned and trimmed on 06/09/25. 2- Resident #62 had his fingernails cleaned and trimmed on 06/08/25. 3- Resident #194 had his fingernails cleaned and trimmed on 06/08/25. 4- Resident #29 had his fingernails cleaned and trimmed on 6/8/25. This failure could place residents who were dependent on staff for ADL care at risk for loss of dignity, risk for infections, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included: 1-Record review of Resident #16's Annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #16 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility with initial admission date of 08/01/2022. Her relevant diagnoses included…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-06-11 · 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 for 1 (100/200 hall) of 3 nurse medication carts reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure LVN O, LVN P, and LVN R responsible for the 100/200 hall nurse cart , counted controlled drugs every shift change. This failure could place residents at risk of not having the medication available due to possible drug diversion. Findings Included: Record review and observation on 06/08/25 at 09:53 AM, of the 100/200 hall nurse cart , with LVN K revealed missing signatures for Off duty and On duty nurses for 06/06/2025 (6:00 AM to 2:00 PM shift), 06/06/25 (2:00 PM to 10:00 PM shift), and 06/07/2025 (10:00 PM to 6:00 AM shift) of the narcotic count sheet. Interview on 06/10/2025 at 12:04 PM, LVN O stated she should have signed the narcotic sheet after counting the narcotics, on 6/6/25 at the beginning and at…

    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 before2025-06-11 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen reviewed for food and nutrition services. 1. The facility failed to ensure food items were properly stored in the facility kitchen on 06/08/25. 2. The facility failed to ensure [NAME] A performed adequate hand hygiene while preparing lunch meal on 06/09/25. These failures could affect residents who received their meals from the facility's only kitchen, by placing them at risk for food-borne illness, and food contamination. Findings included: Observation on 6/8/25 at 9:30 AM revealed a scoop in the bulk oatmeal bin in the dry storage area. Observation on 6/8/25 at 9:33 AM in the facility refrigerator revealed a zip top bag had about 6-7 cut strawberries, 1 lemon, and about 10-12 grapes in it without a date and label. Observation on 6/9/25 at 11:34 AM in the kitchen prep area revealed [NAME] A was making pureed food. [NAME] A did not wear any gloves. [NAME] A took out…

    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 · D2025-06-11 · 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, interview and record review, the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 1 of 6 residents (Resident # 63) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure Resident # 63 was assisted with eating in a dignified manner on 06/08/25, CNA H stood while feeding the resident. This failure could place residents at risk for decreased quality of life, quality of care, and self-esteem. Findings included: Review of Resident #63's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 05/07/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her BIMS score was 15/15 indicating cognitively intact. Her active diagnoses included acute and chronic respiratory failure, presence of artificial larynx, hypertension. In Section GG-Functional Abilities-A. Eating: Dependent. Review of Resident #63's care plan dated 03/27/25 reflected, [Resident63] has…

    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 · D2025-06-11 · tag F0640 — isolated
    Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of 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 a discharge MDS was electronically completed and transmitted to the CMS System within 14 days after completion for one (Resident #32) of one resident reviewed for discharge assessments. The facility failed to complete and transmit Resident #32's discharge MDS assessment within 14 days of completion. This failure could place the residents at risk of having incomplete records. Findings include: Review of Resident #32's face sheet, dated 06/09/25, reflected Resident #32 was a [AGE] year-old female with initial admission date to the facility of 09/10/2024 and discharged from the facility on 01/17/2025. Review of Resident #32's MDS assessments on 06/09/25 revealed Resident #32 did not have a discharge MDS assessment completed. This MDS record was identified as greater than 120 days late on the resident assessment facility task. An interview on 06/09/25 09:56 AM with the MDS Nurse revealed all residents who were discharged from the facility and not…

    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 · D2025-06-11 · 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 and implement a comprehensive care plan for each resident that included measurable objective and timeframes to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 (Resident #58) of 6 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility failed to implement the care plan for Resident #58 by not applying the splint daily to his right arm and hand contraction. This failure could place residents at risk for not having individualized care and services to meet their needs. Findings included: Review of Resident #58's Face Sheet dated 06/10/25 reflected he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of hemiplegia affecting right dominant side. Review of Resident #58's care plan dated 04/22/25, revealed [Resident #58] has an Alteration in musculoskeletal status r/t Right hand CONTRACTURES. Goal. [Resident #58] will remain free of complications related to fracture,…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for two (Resident #12 and Resident #64) of three residents reviewed for incontinence care. The facility failed to ensure: 1. Resident #64's foley catheter was secured prior to transferring Resident #64 from the toilet to his wheelchair on 06/09/25. 2. The facility failed to ensure CNA G provided appropriate perineal care for Resident #12 when she failed to separate the labia when cleaning the resident on 06/09/25. These failures placed residents at risk for the development and/or worsening of urinary tract infections and dislodgement of the foley catheter. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #64's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 04/29/25, reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His BIMs score was 5 indicating his cognitive was severely impaired. His diagnoses…

    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 · Dcited before2025-06-11 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needed respiratory care, including tracheostomy care, was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 (Resident #63) of 6 residents reviewed for tracheostomy care. LVN I failed to maintain sterile technique during tracheostomy (a surgical opening in the neck providing a direct airway through the trachea) care, and change gloves with hands hygiene going from dirty to clean task. These failures could place residents at risk for respiratory infections. Findings included: Review of Resident #63's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 05/07/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her BIMS score was 15/15 indicating cognitively intact. Her active diagnoses included acute and chronic respiratory failure, presence of artificial larynx, hypertension. In Section O-Special Treatments, Procedures, and Programs it revealed she required oxygen…

    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 · D2025-06-11 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that the medication error rate was not 5% or greater. The facility had a medication error rate of 8 %, based on 2 errors of 25 opportunities, which involved one of five residents (Residents #74) and one of four staff (MA L) reviewed for medication errors, in that: The facility failed to ensure: MA L instructed Resident #74 to chew Aspirin low dose chewable and to place the sublingual (a pharmacological route where medication were placed under the tongue to dissolve and be absorbed directly into the bloodstream) buprenorphine under her tongue when administering medications. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving therapeutic effects of their medications. The findings include: A record review of Resident #74's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 05/07/25, reflected a [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 11/15/24. She had a BIMS score of 10, which indicated her cognition was moderately impaired. Diagnoses…

    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
Show the remaining 20 citations
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-11 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to label drugs and biologicals used in the facility in accordance with currently accepted professional principles, and include the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions, and the expiration date when applicable for 1 (100/200 hall nurses cart) of 3 medication nurse cart reviewed for pharmacy services in that: The facility failed to ensure: 1. LVN K responsible for the 100/200 hall nurses cart , removed medications in unsecure containers from the Nurses Cart. 2. The 100/200 hall nurses cart did not have 1 insulin pen for Resident #19 with no open date. Observation of the pen reflected it was used. These failures could affect residents resulting in diminished effectiveness, and not receiving the therapeutic benefits of the medications, and place residents at risk of not having the medication available due to possible drug diversion. The findings included: Record review and observation on 06/08/25 at 09:53 AM, of Nurses Cart Hall 100/200, with LVN K revealed: - The blister pack for Resident #3's tramadol…

    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 · E2025-02-05 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — pattern
    Protect 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 residents were free from Misappropriation of property for 1 (Resident # 1) of 8 residents reviewed for misappropriation of property. The facility failed to protect Resident #1 from misappropriation of property from CNA A. CNA A used Resident #1's Debit card for unauthorized transactions. The noncompliance was identified as Past Noncompliance (PNC). The noncompliance began on 08/24/2024 and ended on 09/03/2024. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the Incident investigation began on 02/04/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of Exploitation/Misappropriation of Property and loss of lifelong earnings. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 02/05/2025 revealed he was a [AGE] year-old male with an admission date of 08/21/2024. His diagnoses included mild cognitive impairment of uncertain or unknown etiology (exact cause of the memory/cognitive decline cannot be determined) Primary…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · E2025-02-05 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — pattern
    Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement their written policies and procedures regarding allegations of abuse/neglect for 1(Resident#1) of 8 residents reviewed for abuse/neglect. The facility failed to report a suspicion of misappropriation of property within 24 hours to the state agency as required by their policy. This failure could place all residents at risk of misappropriation of property. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 02/05/2025 revealed he was a [AGE] year-old male with an admission date of 08/21/2024. His diagnoses included mild cognitive impairment of uncertain or unknown etiology (exact cause of the memory/cognitive decline cannot be determined) Primary Open Angle Glaucoma, (Increased pressure inside eye which may cause gradual damage to the optic nerve), Hypertension (blood pressure in the arteries is consistently elevated). Record review of Resident #1's MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed he had a BIMS score of 14,…

    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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-02-05 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — pattern
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    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 in response to allegations of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment have evidence that all alleged violations were thoroughly investigated and report the results of all investigations to the administrator or his or her designated representative and to other officials in accordance with State law, including to the State Survey Agency, within 5 working days of the incident, and the alleged violation is verified appropriate corrective action was taken for 1 of 8 residents (Residents #1) reviewed for Misappropriation of property. The facility failed to investigate and submit the results of their investigation within 5 days as per their policy, after Resident #1 reported his debit card was missing on 08/24/2024. This failure could place residents at risk of Misappropriation of property. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 02/05/2025 revealed he was a [AGE] year-old male with an admission date 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-05-10 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — pattern
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to immediately consult with the resident 's physician when there was a significant change in the resident 's physical status and a need to alter treatment significantly for two (Residents #17 and #55 ) of ten residents reviewed for notification of changes. 1. ADON C failed to notify the physician and responsible party of Resident #17's change of condition of significant weight loss on 04/28/24. Resident #17's physician was not informed of significant weight loss until 05/06/24. The responsible party for Resident #17 was not notified until 05/07/24. 2. ADON C failed to notify the physician and responsible party of Resident #55's change of condition of significant weight loss on 05/04/24. These failures could place residents at risk for a delay in treatment and diagnosis of new symptoms resulting in serious illness, hospitalization, further decline in the resident's condition, and death. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #17's quarterly 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-05-10 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide the necessary services to maintain good personal hygiene to a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living for three of six residents (Resident #536, Resident #4, and Resident #32) reviewed for quality of life. 1. The facility failed to provide Resident #536, who required extensive assistance, with timely incontinence care on 05/7/24 from 6:00 a.m. to 2:20 p.m. 2. The facility failed to provide Resident #4, who required extensive assistance, with timely incontinence care on 05/07/24 from 6:00 a.m. to 2:50 p.m. and failed to consistently shampoo resident's hair. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #32 had his fingernails cleaned and trimmed. These failures could place residents at risk of skin breakdown, urinary tract infections, and loss of dignity. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #536's Face sheet dated 05/09/24 reflected a [AGE] year-old male with an admission date of 05/06/24. Resident 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 · E2024-05-10 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — pattern
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents maintained acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range and electrolyte balance, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrates that this is not possible or resident preferences indicate otherwise when the facility failed to implement significant weight loss interventions for two (Residents #17 and #55) of seven residents reviewed for significant weight loss, in that: 1. The facility failed to communicate and follow-up on Resident #17's significant weight loss of 44.8 pounds (20%) from 04/05/24 to 04/28/24 to the facility. Resident #17 was weighed on 05/03/24 revealing Resident #17 had lost 46 pounds (21%) for 1 month period from 04/05/24 to 05/03/24. The facility did not notify physician until 05/06/24 and failed to follow physician guidance to notify Dietitian on 05/06/24. The Dietitian was notified by ADON C after surveyor intervention on 05/07/24. 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-05-10 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — pattern
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    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 enteral feeding physician orders were followed for two (Residents #17 and #55) of six residents reviewed for enteral tube feeding, in that: 1. The facility failed to verify adequate nutrition was provided via enteral tube feeding or PEG tube (surgical placement of feeding tube in the stomach to provide nutrition, hydration and/or medicines) for Resident #17. 2. The facility failed to notify Consultant Dietitian of Residents #17 and #55's significant weight loss to ensure nutritional interventions were in place. 3. The facility failed to administer enteral feedings for Resident #17 as ordered by the physician. 4. The facility failed to administer enteral feedings to Resident #55 as ordered by the physician. These failures could place residents who are completely dependent on staff for their nutrition and hydration at risk for nutritional deficit, weight loss, skin breakdown and overall decline in quality of care. Findings include: 1.…

    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 · Ecited before2024-05-10 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — pattern
    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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needed respiratory care, including tracheostomy care, was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for two of two (Resident #20 and Resident # 76) residents reviewed for tracheostomy care. 1. The facility failed to ensure the RT performed hand hygiene during tracheostomy (a surgical opening in the neck providing a direct airway through the trachea) care. 2. The RT failed to maintain sterile technique during the suctioning of Resident #20's trach. 3. The facility failed to ensure LVN L performed hand hygiene during tracheostomy care for Resident #76 and changed her gloves and performed hand hygiene before applying a clean trach drainage sponge around Resident #76's trach stoma. These failures could place residents at risk for respiratory infections. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #20's admission MDS assessment, dated 05/01/24, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old…

    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 · Ecited before2024-05-10 · 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 observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the facility's only kitchen reviewed for food and nutrition services. 1. The facility failed to ensure Dietary Aide ZB wore effective hair restraints to cover his hair and facial hair on 05/07/24 while cleaning dishes and using the dish machine. 2. The facility failed to ensure 1 of 3 freezers were free of ice accumulation on the bottom of freezer. These failures could place residents at risk for food-borne illness and food contamination. Findings included: Observation on 05/07/24 at 10:35 AM with Dietary Aide ZB revealed he did not wear a hair restraint to cover the 2.5 inches of back of hair along with ½ inch near his ear not covered with cap. Dietary Aide ZB had facial hair not covered with no facial hair restraint while doing dishes. Interview on 05/07/24 at 10:50 AM with Dietary Aide ZB stated he knew he should have been wearing a hair restraint while doing dishes to cover his facial hair along…

    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 · E2024-05-10 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    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 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 three of sixteen residents (Resident #536, Resident #38, and Resident #32) observed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure that CNA K and CNA G performed hand hygiene while providing incontinence care to Resident #536 on 05/07/24 2. CNA G failed to prevent cross contamination with the residents foley catheter bag. 3. The facility failed to ensure that CNA H changed her gloves and performed hand hygiene while providing incontinence care to Resident #38 on 05/08/24. 4. The facility failed to ensure that CNA U changed her gloves and performed hand hygiene while providing incontinence care to Resident #32 on 05/07/24. These failures could place the residents at risk of cross-contamination and development 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-05-10 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — pattern
    Make 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

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for one of one laundry room reviewed for environment. 1. The facility failed to properly dispose and maintain the lint accumulation in the facility dryers in a timely manner. 2. The facility failed to properly maintain sanitary handwashing area in the laundry room hand washing station and for the laundry employee restroom. This failure could put residents at risk for an unsafe and unsanitary environment. Findings included: Observation on 05/09/2024 at 9:00 AM of facility's laundry room revealed there were three (3) dryers that were in use at that time. Observation of the lint collector area beneath two (2) dryers revealed a layer of thick lint about 2 inches thick accumulated on the top of lint trap and on the bottom of the lint trap. Observation of third dryer revealed a thick accumulation of lint about 2 inches thick on the top side of the lint filter and a clump of lint about 6 inches wide and 12 inches long on the floor of the lint…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-10 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
    Reasonably 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 except when to do so would endanger the health or safety of the resident or other residents for 1 (Resident #486) of 6 residents reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure Resident #486's call light was placed within their reach. This failure could place residents at risk of injuries and unmet needs. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #486 Comprehensive MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted [DATE]. Resident #486 had diagnoses which included traumatic brain injury (brain dysfunction due to injury to head), Methicillin Susceptible Staphylococcus Aureus infection (antibiotic resistant bacterial infection), and anemia (low iron) with a blank BIMS score. Record review of Resident #486's care plan reflected resident was at risk of falls, with 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-10 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 (Resident #486) of 6 residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #486 wore a helmet, as ordered by physician, to prevent possible injury when ambulating. This failure could result in residents to experience accident, injuries, and diminished quality of life. Findings included 1. Record review of Resident #486 Comprehensive MDS dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted [DATE]. Resident #486 had diagnoses which included traumatic brain injury (brain dysfunction due to injury to head), Methicillin Susceptible Staphylococcus Aureus infection (antibiotic resistant bacterial infection), and anemia (low iron) and BIMS score was blank. Record review of Resident #486's care plan reflected resident was at risk of falls, with the goal to be free of falls dated 05/02/2024 with a target date 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-10 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for one of two residents (Resident #38) reviewed for catheter care. The facility failed to ensure CNA H provided catheter care and appropriate perineal care for Resident #38 when she failed to clean the resident's penis, scrotum, and buttocks on 05/08/24. This failure could place residents at risk for the development and/or worsening of urinary tract infections and skin breakdown. Findings included: Record review of resident #38s quarterly MDS assessment, dated 02/12/24, reflected an [AGE] year-old male with an admission date of 04/20/23. He had a BIMS score of 4 which indicated he was severely cognitively impaired. He was dependent of care for all ADL. He had a foley catheter and colostomy (an opening into the colon from outside of the body). Active diagnoses included dementia, chronic respiratory failure,…

    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 · Ecited before2023-08-14 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
    Ensure 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 ensure each resident received and the facility provided food that was palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature for one of one meal reviewed. 1.The facility failed to ensure hot food was maintained at 135 degrees while on the steam table. 2. The facility failed to maintain a food temperature log to ensure hot foods were maintained at 135 degrees since July 13, 2023 The deficient practice could affect the residents who received their meals from the kitchen by contributing to poor intake of nutrition, weight loss, and illness. Findings included: Observation on 08/11/23 at 12:41 pm revealed the facility was serving broccoli, fried breaded shrimp, and mac and cheese. DA D was taking the food from the steam table and placing it onto residents' plates that were taken out of the kitchen. An interview with DA A on 08/11/23 at 12:45 pm revealed he had not cooked any of the food. DA A stated he was asked to serve the food by [NAME] U. DA A revealed he had not completed any temperature checks 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-03-23 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide the necessary services for residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for 3 (Resident #38, Resident #55, Resident #67) of 8 residents reviewed for ADLs. The facility failed to ensure: 1- Resident #38 had his fingernails trimmed and cleaned. 2- Resident #55 had his fingernails trimmed and cleaned. 3- Resident #67 had her fingernails cleaned This failure could place residents who were dependent on staff for ADL care at risk for loss of dignity, risk for infections and a decreased quality of life. Findings include: 1- Review of Resident #38's Comprehensive MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #38 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses included cerebral infarction (disrupted blood flow to the brain due to problems with the blood vessels that supply it), contracture muscle of the left hand, muscle weakness, and elevated…

    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 · Ecited before2023-03-23 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
    Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide food that was palatable, attractive, and at an appetizing temperature, and prepared by methods which conserved the nutritive value, flavor, and appearance for one of one meals (03/22/23 lunch) reviewed for dietary services. The facility failed to ensure residents on regular diet received beans that were not burnt and overcooked for lunch on 03/22/23. This deficient practice placed residents at risk for poor food intake and nutrition. Findings included: Interview on 03/21/22 at 10:45 AM with Resident #41 revealed the food at times was overcooked and was burnt often. Interview on 03/21/23 at 11:13 AM with Resident #29 revealed the food was of poor quality, terrible taste and food was overcooked especially the vegetables. Observation on 03/22/23 at 12:56 PM of Lunch test tray of regular diet revealed charro beans tasted burnt and bitter taste. Observation and Interview on 03/22/23 at 1:03 PM with Dietary Manager revealed she tasted the charro beans and told surveyor they tasted burnt. She stated if…

    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 · D2023-03-23 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolated
    Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
    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 a right to personal privacy and confidentiality of medical records for 1 (Resident #23) of 4 residents reviewed for privacy and confidentiality. The facility failed to ensure LVN D logged out of his computer and protected Resident#23's Medication Administration Record. This failure could place residents at risk for low self-esteem, loss of dignity and decreased quality of life due to medication administration record being accessible to others. Findings included: Record review of Resident #23's Comprehensive MDS assessment, dated 01/20/23, reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included metabolic encephalopathy (problem in the brain. It is caused by a chemical imbalance in the blood), quadriplegia (paralysis of all four limbs), and tracheostomy (an incision in the windpipe made to support breathing). During an observation on 03/22/2023 at 12:30 PM, LVN D stepped…

    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 · Dcited before2023-03-23 · 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 assure that medications were secure and inaccessible to unauthorized staff and residents for 1 (nurses medication cart) of 3 medication carts reviewed for medication storage. The facility failed to ensure: The medication supplies were secured or attended by authorized staff when the nurses' cart in hall 400 was left unlocked and unattended in the hallway 400. This failure could place residents at risk to access and ingest of medications leading to a risk for harm and could lead to missing medication. The findings include: During an observation on 03/22/2023 at 12:30 PM, LVN D stepped away from the medication cart, he entered Resident #23 room to administer medication through the G-tube (a surgically placed device used to give direct access to the stomach). LVN D left the nurses medication cart in hallway 500, by room [ROOM NUMBER], unlocked. The lock was in the out position and the drawers were able to be opened, leaving the medications…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to OPCO SKILLED MANAGEMENT — 66 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 52.3+0.7 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.2+0.8 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 51.7-0.7 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.3+0.7 vs chain
The other 65 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.3★, per CMS)
1 of 5Bluebird Wellness And RehabilitationSaint Louis, MO 1 of 5Brentwood Place ThreeDallas, TX 1 of 5Broadway Nursing & RehabilitationSan Antonio, TX 1 of 5Cameron Nursing CenterCameron, MO 1 of 5Carmel Hills Wellness & RehabilitationIndependence, MO 1 of 5Casa Arena Healthcare LLCAlamogordo, NM 1 of 5Casa Maria HealthcareRoswell, NM 1 of 5Forest Park Nursing & RehabilitationDallas, TX 1 of 5Fort Worth Wellness & RehabilitationFort Worth, TX 1 of 5Glenview Wellness & RehabilitationNorth Richland Hills, TX 1 of 5Highland Pines Nursing HomeLongview, TX 1 of 5Ivy Creek Wellness & RehabilitationWaco, TX 1 of 5Las Cruces Village Nursing & Rehabilitation LLCLas Cruces, NM 1 of 5Magnolia Wellness CenterSaint Louis, MO 1 of 5Maple Grove Wellness & RehabilitationFenton, MO 1 of 5Mineola Gardens Wellness & RehabilitationMineola, TX 1 of 5Pine Grove ManorSaint Louis, MO 1 of 5Rehab Of Kansas City SouthKansas City, MO 1 of 5The Hillcrest Of North DallasDallas, TX 1 of 5West Side Campus Of CareWhite Settlement, TX 1 of 5Willow Ridge Wellness & RehabilitationFort Worth, TX 1 of 5Willowcreek Wellness & RehabilitationFlorissant, MO 2 of 5Arbor Lake Nursing & Rehabilitation, LLCFort Worth, TX 2 of 5Aztec HealthcareAztec, NM 2 of 5Betty Dare Wellness & Rehabilitation LLCAlamogordo, NM 2 of 5Blue Springs Wellness & RehabilitationBlue Springs, MO 2 of 5Cypress Springs Wellness & RehabilitationMount Vernon, TX 2 of 5Fiesta Park Wellness & RehabilitationAlbuquerque, NM 2 of 5Hilltop At Blue River, TheKansas City, MO 2 of 5La Vida Buena HealthcareLas Vegas, NM 2 of 5Los Alamos Wellness & RehabilitationLos Alamos, NM 2 of 5McGregor Wellness & RehabilitationMc Gregor, TX 2 of 5Monarch Springs Wellness & RehabilitationUniversity City, MO 2 of 5Northrise Wellness & RehabilitationLas Cruces, NM 2 of 5Prescott Valley Nursing & RehabilitationPrescott Valley, AZ 2 of 5Prescott Village Nursing & RehabilitationPrescott, AZ 2 of 5Rehabilitation Center Of Independence, TheIndependence, MO 2 of 5San Antonio Wellness & RehabilitationSan Antonio, TX 2 of 5Skyline Nursing CenterDallas, TX 2 of 5Sunny Springs Nursing & RehabSulphur Springs, TX

Showing 40 of 65; lowest-rated first.

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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
DALLAS COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICTOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 02/20/2015
BRADLEY, SHANNANIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 12/11/2023
CASTANEDA, EDMUNDOIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/10/2022
CERISE, FREDERICKIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/24/2014
BRENTWOOD 4 NURSING & REHAB LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/29/2018
GARETZ, DAVIDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/29/2018
GURWITZ, SOLOMONIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
HAGINS, ELIZABETHIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/31/2025
KAPLAN, ESTHERIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
KAPLAN, MORDECHAIIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/31/2025
MINDLE, ADAMIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
UNGER, JEFFREYIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/03/2025
3505 BUCKNER BRENTWOOD 4, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 03/29/2018
CONTINUUM REHAB GROUP LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 03/29/2018
ESDOV INVESTMENTS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 03/29/2018
GIBRALTAR TRUSTOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 03/29/2018
OPCO CA SKILLED MGMT INC.OrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 03/29/2018
OPCO TEXAS SKILLED MGMT LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 03/29/2018
YEREK INVESTMENTS, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 03/29/2018
NAYAK, NEETAIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
OKELU, BASILIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 02/04/2025

9 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.

$6.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-10.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 70%Medicare 7%Other / private 23%

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 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

$278per resident / day
operating cost
$8,443per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$251per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

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 676270. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-11, 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