Fair Park Health & Rehabilitation Center
2815 Martin Luther King Jr Boulevard, Dallas, TX 75215 · For profit - Corporation · 114 certified beds · (214) 421-2159 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- CMS has flagged it for abuse
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited May 2026
- a high number of inspection citations overall (36) — 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 independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (92%) runs well above the national median (45%)
- about 19% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 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
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 3 to 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 18.9% | 15.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.0% | 3.0% | 5.4% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.6% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 2.4% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.2% | 3.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 20.9% | 14.0% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 8.8% | 18.0% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.3% | 3.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 24.9% | 13.4% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 4.4% | 9.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 88.0% | 79.4% | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.55 therapist hours per resident per day in 2025Q4 — more than 86% of the 13,714 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 31% 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 14% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 114 beds and averages 53.1 residents a day — about 47% occupied, or roughly 61 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 2.97 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.54 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.69 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 2.63 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.15 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.35 to 0.88 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 92% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
36 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 26 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2026-07-10 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — patternReasonably 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences for four of eighteen residents (Residents #2, #19, #30, and #35) reviewed for reasonable accommodation of needs. The facility failed to ensure the call light system in Resident Residents #2, #19, #30, and #35's rooms were in a position that was accessible to the residents on 07/08/2026. This failure could place the residents at risk of being unable to obtain assistance when needed and help in the event of an emergency.Findings included: Resident #19 Record review of Resident 19's Face Sheet, dated 07/09/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body), hemiparesis (weakness on one side of the body), and history of falling. Record review of Resident #19's Comprehensive MDS Assessment (assessment used to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-07-10 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — patternKeep 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's right to personal privacy during medical treatment and personal care and confidentiality of personal and medical records for five of twenty residents (Residents #2, #6, #12, #21, and #49) reviewed for privacy and confidentiality. 1.The facility failed to ensure Residents #12, #21, and #49's personal medical information was secured on 07/09/2026. 2.The facility failed to ensure LVN B closed the door or pulled the privacy curtain while checking Resident #2's blood sugar and administering his insulin on 07/09/2026. 3.The facility failed to ensure LVN B closed the door or pulled the privacy curtain while checking Resident #6's blood sugar on 07/09/2026. These failures could place the residents at risk of not having their personal privacy maintained while treatments were provided, which could result in the residents feeling uncomfortable during care, and having their personal and medical record exposed to unauthorized…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-07-10 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the residents' environment remained free of hazards as was possible for three of eight residents (Residents # 6, #38, #45) and two direct care staff (LVN A and WCN E) reviewed for accident hazard. 1.The facility failed to ensure there was no razor inside Resident #6's room on 07/08/2026. 2.The facility failed to ensure there was no cleaner disinfectant inside Resident #45's room on 07/08/2026. 3.The facility failed to ensure WCN E did not leave her scissors, unattended, inside Resident #38's room on 07/09/2026. 4.The facility failed to ensure there was no germicidal wipes on top of a cart parked in the hallway, unattended, on 07/08/2026. 5.The facility failed to ensure a container of germicidal wipes was not left at the nurse station unattended on 07/09/2026. These failures could place residents at risk of injuries and exposure to toxic chemicals.Findings included: 1.Record review of Resident #6's Face Sheet, dated 07/09/2026,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-07-10 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to, in accordance with State and Federal laws, store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments under proper temperature controls, and permitted only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for five of eighteen residents (Residents #8, #15, #38, #45, and #47) reviewed for medication storage. 1.The facility failed to ensure that there was no medication for hemorrhoids inside Resident #8's room on 07/08/2026. 2.The facility failed to ensure that there was no laxative solution inside Resident #15's room on 07/08/2026. 3.The facility failed to ensure that there was no nasal spray inside Resident #47's room on 07/08/2026. 4.The facility failed to ensure that there were no eye drops, calcium alginate powder, and wound cleanser inside Resident #45's room on 07/08/2026. 5.The facility failed to ensure WCN E did not leave a cup of topical antibiotic on top of Resident #38's overbed table on 07/09/2026. These failures could place the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-07-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on 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 the facility's kitchen reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to ensure all food items in kitchen was dated and discarded prior to their use-by date and were properly sealed. This failure could place residents at risk for food contamination and food-borne illness. During an observation on 07/08/2026 between 9:05 AM and 9:39 AM in the facility's kitchen revealed: One gallon bag containing Cookie pieces dated 05/01/2025 expiration date 09/01/2025.One gallon bag of cake mix dated 04/07/2026 with an expiration date of 05/07/2026.One large plastic bag containing ketchup with no visible dates. One container of all-vegetable shortening 02/14/2022 best buy date of 12/25/2023.One ready pie crust with no visible dates, not properly sealed and exposed to air contaminants. One 6lb 15 oz can Garbanzo beans dated 01/09/2023 with an expiration date of 07/12/2025. One 5lb 13oz can of leaf…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-07-10 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for four of eighteen residents (Residents #11, #19, #31, and #33) reviewed for infection control. 1.The facility failed to ensure CNA C performed hand hygiene during Resident #31's incontinent care on 07/08/2026. 2.The facility failed to ensure MA G performed hand hygiene when preparing medications for Residents #11, #19, and #33 on 07/09/2026. These failures could place residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of infections.Findings included: 1.Record review of Resident #31's Face Sheet, dated 07/09/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with muscle weakness. Record review of Resident #31's Comprehensive MDS Assessment, dated 04/24/2026, reflected the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-07-10 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan within 48 hours for each resident that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality care to one of eight residents (Resident #47) reviewed for baseline care plan. The facility failed to ensure Resident #47 had a baseline care plan for atelectasis after admission to the facility on [DATE]. This failure could place the resident at risk of not receiving necessary care, treatment, and services upon admission that could result in worsening conditions.Findings included: Record review of Resident #47's Face Sheet, dated 07/09/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Upon admission, the resident diagnosis included atelectasis (collapse of the lungs that could result in SOB and coughing). Record review of Resident #47's Comprehensive MDS Assessment, dated 05/09/2026, reflected…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-07-10 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for one of eight residents (Resident #47) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #47 had a care plan for her acute upper respiratory infection on 07/09/2026. This failure could place the residents at risk of not receiving the necessary care and services.Findings included: Record review of Resident #47's Face Sheet, dated 07/09/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with acute upper respiratory infection (infection that could affect the nose, throat, and voice box) eleven days after admission. Record review of Resident #47's Comprehensive MDS Assessment,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-07-10 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the timeliness of each resident's person-centered, comprehensive care plan, and to ensure that the comprehensive care plan is reviewed and revised by an interdisciplinary team for two of twelve residents (Residents #12 and Resident #29) reviewed for care plans revision. The facility failed to ensure the care plans for Residents #12 and Resident #29 were reviewed and revised after each comprehensive and quarterly assessment. This failure could place the residents at risk of care and needs not being met. Findings included: Resident #12 Record review of Resident #12's Face Sheet, dated 07/09/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #12's Quarterly MDS Assessment reflected that the last MDS completed for the residents was on 06/09/2026. Record review of Resident #12's Quarterly Care Plan reflected the last care plan completed for the resident on 03/24/2026. Resident #29…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-07-10 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who were incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for one of five residents (Resident #45) reviewed for catheter care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #45's catheter bag was off the floor on 07/08/2026. This failure could place the residents at risk of urinary tract infection.Findings included: Record review of Resident #45's Face Sheet, dated 07/09/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder (the muscles and nerves that control the bladder do not work properly due to illness). Record review of Resident #45's Comprehensive MDS Assessment, dated 05/22/2026, reflected the resident was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15. The Comprehensive MDS Assessment indicated the resident had an indwelling catheter (a thin, flexible tube inserted in the bladder to allow the urine to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 26 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-07-10 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who needed respiratory care were provided such care consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for one of ten residents (Residents #47) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #47's breathing mask was properly stored when not in use on 07/08/2026. This failure could place residents at risk of respiratory infection and not having their respiratory needs met.Findings included: Record review of Resident #47's Face Sheet, dated 07/09/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with acute upper respiratory infection. Record review of Resident #47's Comprehensive MDS Assessment, dated 06/12/2026, reflected the resident had a moderate impairment in cognition with a BIMS score of 08. The Comprehensive MDS Assessment indicated the resident had…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-06 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident was free from abuse, neglect and corporal punishment of any type by anyone one of four residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse. PTA M reported and observed Resident #2 hitting Resident #1 while in the smoking area on 04/09/26. This failure could place residents at risk of sustaining serious harm and not being free from abuse.Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet, dated 05/06/26, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted [DATE]. Resident #1 had a diagnosis of COPD (obstructed airflow).Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 03/20/26, reflected BIMS score of 12 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS assessment reflected the resident had active diagnoses of COPD and bi-polar.Record review of Resident #2's Face Sheet, dated 05/07/26, reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted [DATE]. Resident #2 had a diagnosis of schizophrenia (severe brain disorder).Record…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-04-02 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident that are complete; accurately documented; readily accessible; and systemically organized in accordance with accepted professional standards for 2 of 3 residents (Residents #1 and #2) reviewed for clinical records regarding wound care.1. The facility failed to ensure nursing staff documented that physician ordered wound care was provided to Resident #1 for a skin tear on her left buttocks on 03/06/26, 03/07/26, 03/08/26, 03/14/26, and 03/15/26 and for a post-surgical wound on her abdomen on 03/06/26, 03/07/26, 03/08/26, 03/14/26, 03/15/26, 03/20/26, 03/21/26, 03/28/26 and 03/30/26. 2. The facility failed to ensure nursing staff documented that physician ordered wound care was provided to Resident #2 on 03/10/26, 03/20/26, 03/27/26, 03/28/26, 03/29/26. This failure could place residents at risk for incomplete and inaccurately documented medical records that included their progress treatment,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-02-21 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, 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 2 of 2 Residents (Resident #1, and Resident #2) observed for infection control. 1.The facility failed to ensure CNA D and RN A utilized Enhanced Barrier Precautions and performed hand hygiene during wound care for Resident #1 on 02/21/26. 2. The facility failed to ensure RN A handled Resident #1's wound care supplies appropriately to prevent cross contamination during wound care on 02/21/26. 3.The facility failed to ensure LVN B performed hand hygiene during wound care for Resident # 2 and failed to prevent cross contamination of wound care supplies on 02/21/26. These failures could place the residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of infection. Findings included: 1. Record Review of Resident #1's Face Sheet…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-12-12 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide a safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable environment for 4 of 10 resident rooms on the 100 - hall (Resident rooms #1, #2, #3, and #4). The facility failed to ensure Resident rooms #1, #2, #3, and #4, were thoroughly cleaned and sanitized. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of living in an unclean and unsanitary environment which could lead to a decreased quality of life.Findings include: An observation on 9/23/25 at 8:26 AM of resident room [ROOM NUMBER] reflected trash on the floor and white milk spilled on the floor, near the resident's bed. An observation on 9/23/25 at 8:27 AM of resident room [ROOM NUMBER] reflected large patches of brown and black stains on the floor, under the resident's bed. An observation on 9/23/25 at 8:28 AM of resident room [ROOM NUMBER] reflected large brownish stains on the floor, under the resident's bed. An observation on 9/23/25 at 8:28 AM of resident room [ROOM NUMBER] reflected…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-12 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure each resident is being watched and has assistance devices, when needed, to prevent accidents for six of nine residents (Resident #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, and #9) reviewed for accident hazards. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, and #9 were properly supervised while smoking in the smoking area of the facility. This failure could place the residents at risk of harm and serious injuries. Findings include: 1 Record review of Resident #4's Face Sheet, dated 09/23/25, reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included Asthma (inflamed airways) and COPD (lung disease). Record review of Resident #4's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 8/22/25, reflected she had a BIMS score of 15 (intact cognitive response). For active diagnosis it reflected a stroke. Record review of Resident #4's Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 9/23/25, reflected the resident was a smoker and an…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-12 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning, is provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, the residents' goals and preferences for one of three residents (Resident #2) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2's nasal canula was properly stored in a bag when not in use on 09/23/25. This failure could place the residents at risk for respiratory infection and not having their respiratory needs met. Findings include: Record review of Resident #2's Face Sheet, dated 09/23/25, reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included Chronic Respiratory Failure (lack of oxygen) and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (lung disease). Record review of Resident #2's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 8/08/25, reflected he had a BIMS score…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-12-12 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
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 call system was accessible to residents while in their bed or other sleeping accommodations within the resident's room for two of five residents (Resident #1, and #3) reviewed for Reasonable Accommodation of Needs. The facility failed to ensure the call light system in Resident #1, and #3's room was in a position that was accessible to the residents on 09/23/25. This failure could place the residents at risk of being unable to obtain assistance when needed and help in the event of an emergency.Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet, dated 09/23/25, reflected he was an [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included stroke and lack of coordination. Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 9/05/25, reflected he had a BIMS score of 9 (moderate cognitive impairment). For ADL care, it reflected the resident required total assistance. Record review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-08 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident had the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation for two (Resident #1 and Resident #2) of two reviewed for abuse and neglect.The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 was free from abuse, on 6/27/25, when Resident #1 struck her in the forehead with a cane, which resulted in a laceration.This failure could place residents at risk of abuse and emotional stress. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 02/26/25, reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included: dementia of unspecified severity without behavioral disturbance (a decline in memory or other cognitive function not accompanied by aggression), psychotic disturbance (delusions or hallucinations), delirium due to psychological condition (acute confusion linked to psychiatric causes), cognitive communication deficit (difficulty…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-10 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to refer all residents with newly evident or possible serious mental disorder, intellectual disability, or a related condition for level II resident review upon a significant change in status assessment for 1 (Resident #4) of 5W residents reviewed for PASARR. The facility failed to submit a complete and accurate request for nursing facility specialized services (NFSS) in the LTC Online Portal 02/20/2025 as required within 20 business days after the date of the Interdisciplinary Team meeting . The NFSS Request submittal by the NF was denied on 02/10/2025, and there was no evidence of facility follow up. to ensure the request was approved to provide specialized services for PASARR for the resident. These failures could place the resident at risk of not receiving necessary care and/or services. Findings Included: Record review of the NFSS submission for Resident #4 on 02/10/2025 revealed the submission was completed electronically, and not via SIMPLELTC web…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-06-10 · tag F0825 — isolatedProvide or get specialized rehabilitative services as required for a 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 interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to provide specialized rehabilitative services such as but not limited to physical therapy, speech -language pathology, occupational therapy, respiratory therapy, and rehabilitative services for mental illness and intellectual disability or services of a lesser intensity as required in the resident's comprehensive plan of care for 1 (Resident #4) of 5 residents reviewed for specialized rehabilitative services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4 received physical therapy per the PASARR Comprehensive Service Plan January 2025 to April 2025 . This failure could place residents who require specialized rehabilitative services at risk of a decline in health status and a decreased quality of life. The findings included: Record review of Resident #4's admission Record, dated 06/10/2025, reflected a 39- year-old female. She was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #4's Medical Diagnosis list, dated 06/10/2025, reflected Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to properly secure medications in a locked compartment for 1 of 2 medication carts (Unit 2) reviewed for drug storage. On 05/13/2025, LVN D left the Unit 2 medication cart unlocked and unattended for an unknown amount of time. These failures placed residents at risk for unauthorized access to the medication cart and consumption of harmful medications. Findings included: An observation and interview on 5/13/25 at 7:46 AM revealed an unlocked medication cart was situated in a hallway across from the Unit 2 nurses' station. There was no nurse or medication aide seen in the vicinity of the cart. RN C approached from around a corner and stated she did not know why the medication cart had been left unlocked and believed that MA E had the keys. RN C was observed locking the cart. During an observation and interview on 5/13/25 at 7:50 AM, MA E was passing medications on the 100 Hall and stated she did not have the keys to the 200 Hall at that time and believed the nurse had them. During an interview on 5/13/25 at 8:47…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-14 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on 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 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for kitchen safety. 1. The facility failed to seal opened items in plastic bags in the dry storage pantry, refrigerator, and freezer areas on 05/12/25. 2. The facility failed to ensure an expired item in the dry storage pantry area was removed on 05/12/25. 3. The facility failed to ensure the dented cans in the dry storage area with the other canned food were removed from the shelf on 05/12/25. 4. The facility failed to clean the 6 A/C vents in the kitchen on 05/12/25. These deficient practices could affect residents who received meals and/or snacks from the facility's only kitchen by placing them at risk for cross contamination and other food-borne illnesses. Findings included: Observation of the facility's kitchen dry storage, refrigerator and freezer areas and the kitchen A/C vents on 05/12/25 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-05-14 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a discharge summary that included but was not limited to, (i) A recapitulation of the resident's stay that includes, but was not limited to, diagnoses, course of illness/treatment or therapy, and pertinent lab, radiology, and consultation results; (ii) A final summary of the resident's status; (iii) Reconciliation of all pre-discharge medications with the resident's post-discharge medications (both prescribed and over-the-counter) for one of (Resident #43) of two residents reviewed for discharge planning. 1. The facility failed to complete a discharge summary and a reconciliation of medications for Resident #43 when he planned discharge home on [DATE]. This failure could place residents at risk of a recapitulation of the stay being unavailable to help ensure continuity of care once they went back home and/or discharged from the facility. Findings included: 1. Record Review of Resident #43's admission face sheet dated 03/08/2025 reflected that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-14 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living, received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 1 of 6 residents (Residents #22) reviewed for ADL care. CNA G failed to ensure Resident #22 was provided her shower as scheduled on the 2:00 PM to 10:00 PM shift on 5/12/25. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving services or care, decreased quality of life, and decreased self-esteem. Findings included: Record review of Resident #22's admission Record dated 5/12/25 reflected a [AGE] year-old female originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #22's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected she had a BIMS score of 9 indicating moderately impaired cognition. Her diagnoses included hypertension (high blood pressure); stroke; hemiparesis (muscle weakness or partial paralysis on one side of the body often caused by a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-14 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for one of five (Resident #22) residents reviewed for pharmacy services. The Facility failed to ensure nursing staff ordered medications in a timely manner for Resident #22 resulting in her missing a scheduled morning dose of Robaxin used to control her muscle spasms on 5/13/25. This failure placed the residents at risk of not receiving medications as ordered by the physician and a delay in treatment and worsening of their condition. Findings included: Record review of Resident #22's admission Record dated 5/12/25 reflected a [AGE] year-old female originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #22's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected she had a BIMS score of 9 indicating moderately impaired cognition. Her 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-10-23 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide 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 review, the facility failed to ensure that residents, who needed respiratory care, were provided care consistent with professional standards of practice for 2 (Resident #1 and #4) of 4 residents reviewed for Respiratory Care. 1. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #1's nasal cannula, for the oxygen concentrator, was placed in a sanitary container when not in use. 2. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #4's oxygen tubing (flexible tube used to deliver oxygen to the nose through two prongs) was changed. These failures could place residents at risk for respiratory infection and not having their respiratory needs met. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet, dated 10/23/2024, reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included COPD, and history of pneumonia. Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] reflected, he had a Brief Interview for Mental Status…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that residents' environment remained free of accident hazards as was possible for 1 (Resident #2) of 3 residents reviewed for accident prevention. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2's bed was placed in the lowest position to assist in fall prevention. This failure could prevent residents from having an environment that was free and clear of accidents and hazards. Findings included: Record review of Resident #2's Face Sheet, dated 10/23/2024, reflected he was an [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included muscle spasms, lack of coordination, and muscle weakness. Record review of Resident #2's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] reflected, he had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 5 (severe cognitive impairment) and for ADL care it reflected assistance for transfers, toileting, and bathing and the resident was totally dependent for assistance. Record review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-23 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all drugs and biologicals were accurately dispensed and administered to meet the needs of each resident when 1 (Resident #3) of 6 residents were reviewed for pharmaceutical services. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #3 did not miss doses of medication that was to be administered at bedtime. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving their medications as ordered by their physician. Findings included: Review of Resident #3's Face Sheet, dated 10/23/24, reflected that Resident #3 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted [DATE] with cerebral infarction (stroke: blood flow to the brain is blocked) affecting left non-dominant side, left elbow contracture (permanent tightening of the muscle), and unspecified pain. Review of Resident #3's Quarterly MDS (Minimum Data Set: screening tool to assess health status) Comprehensive Assessment, dated 10/02/24, reflected that Resident #3 had moderate cognitive impairment with a BIMS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-04-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen. 1. The facility failed to ensure refrigerator items were dated and labeled. 2. The facility failed to ensure ice scoop was left outside of ice bin. 3. The facility failed to ensure [NAME] A performed hand hygiene during lunch meal service on 4/4/24. These failures could affect residents who received their meals from the facility's only kitchen, by placing them at risk for food-borne illness if consumed, and food contamination. Findings included: Observation in the kitchen on 04/03/24 at 9:43 AM revealed a box of celery in the walk-in refrigerator that was not dated and labeled. Observation in the kitchen on 04/03/24 at 9:50 AM revealed a box of tomatoes in reach-in refrigerator that was not dated and labeled. Observation on 04/03/24 at 09:52 AM revealed that ice scoop was left inside the ice bin touching the ice cubes within the ice machine. Observation of lunch meal…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-05 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide the necessary services for residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for 2 (Resident #19, Resident #22) of 8 residents reviewed for ADLs. The facility failed to ensure: 1- Resident #19 had her fingernails cleaned and trimmed. 2- Resident #22 had his fingernails cleaned and trimmed. These failures 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. Record review of Resident #19's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #19 was a [AGE] year-old female readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses included hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body) affecting left side, lack of coordination, and contracture of the left elbow. Resident #19 had a BIMS score of 9, which indicated her cognition was moderately impaired. The MDS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-05 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure 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 provide treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding for one (Residents #25) of one resident reviewed for feeding tubes in that: LVN B failed to check placement of Resident #25's G-Tube (a tube inserted through the abdomen that delivers nutrition directly to the stomach) by checking for gastric residual (quantity remaining) prior to administering the resident medications. This failure could affect residents by placing them at risk of obstruction of the G-tube, nausea, vomiting and potential for aspiration and discomfort. Findings included: Record review of Resident #25's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 04/03/24, reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE], with diagnoses including dysphagia (swallowing difficulties), cerebral infarction (occurs as a result of disrupted blood flow to the brain due to problems with the blood vessels that supply it), and diabetes…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-05 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that a Resident who needs respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 2 (Resident #23) reviewed for respiratory care, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #23 Oxygen humidity bottle were labeled or dated. These failures could place the resident at risk for respiratory infection and not having their respiratory needs met. The findings were: Review of Resident # 23s Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old female re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses include Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a group of diseases that cause airflow blockage and breathing- related problems), Congestive heart failure (compromised blood supply from heart to meet body's needs), Hyperlipidemia (high blood lipid level), Schizophrenia {severe mental disorder) and was on oxygen therapy in the facility. Review of Resident #23's care plan dated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection control program designed to prevent the development and transmission of infection for 1 resident (Resident #10) of 8 observed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure RN C performed hand hygiene and changed gloves during wound care for Resident #10. This failure could place residents at risk for infection and cross contamination. Findings include: Record review of resident #10's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 03/20/24, reflected a [AGE] year-old male with an admission date of 08/15/23 with diagnoses included peripheral vascular disease, chronic ulcer of unspecified part of left lower leg, and non-pressure chronic ulcer of other part of unspecified foot. Resident #10 had a BIMS of 12 which indicated Resident #10's cognition was moderately impaired. Resident#10 required moderate assistance of one-person physical assistance with dressing, and toileting hygiene. The resident was occasionally incontinent of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-22 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for infection. The facility failed to ensure CNA A performed hand hygiene during incontinence care for Resident #1. This failure placed residents at risk for infection. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's Face Sheet dated 02/21/24, reflected he was an [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. His diagnosis included Alzheimer's disease. An observation and interview on 02/21/23 at 11:15 AM with CNA B and CNA A revealed they were preparing to provide Resident #1 with incontinence care. The resident was lying in bed, with his brief already removed. CNA A washed her hands and put on gloves. CNA A cleansed the resident's penis and scrotal area. Resident #1 was assisted to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-27 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — isolatedHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
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 revealed the facility failed to make prompt efforts to resolve grievances for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) whose records were reviewed for grievances. The facility failed to document, investigate, and respond to Resident#1's family member/visitor's complaint communicated to the Administrator. This deficient practice could contribute to the resident's frustration and feelings of hopelessness. The findings were: A review of Resident #1's electronic sheet face dated undated revealed a [AGE] year-old male originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. His diagnoses included Dysphagia (swallowing difficulties), Vascular parkinsonism (symmetrical lower-body parkinsonism with gait unsteadiness and absence of tremors), and encephalopathy (damage or disease that affects the brain). Resident #1 had a guardian listed. A review of Resident #1's Minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a brief interview of mental status (BIMS) of 02, indicating…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to CREATIVE SOLUTIONS IN HEALTHCARE — 149 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 2.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
The other 148 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.1★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 148; 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 / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| HUGGINS, LINDA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 12/01/2023 |
| MAK, DAVID | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 05/17/2021 |
| DALLAS III ENTERPRISES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 12/01/2023 |
| BLAKE, GARY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 12/01/2023 |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 85% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $874K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 19% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. 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
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in TX
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Texas Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-09-01 — CMS provider number 675417. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-07-10, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.