La Vida Serena Nursing And Rehabilitation

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

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.

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

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

45.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 72 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 85.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 20 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.31 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 50% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 68.4 residents a day — about 57% occupied, or roughly 52 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 2.87 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.25 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.75 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 2.57 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.00 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.29 to 0.13 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

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.

21 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 9 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2025-05-08 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
  Develop 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 the interviews and record review, the facility failed to review and revise Resident Care Plans after each assessment for 1 of 3 Residents (Resident # 1) whose records were reviewed for care plan revision/timing, The [NAME] of Resident # 1 was not updated to reflect the required extensive assistance with 2 persons for transfers via mechanical lift . These deficient practices could affect any resident and contribute to the Residents not receiving the care and services they need. The findings included: Record review of Resident # 1's face sheet dated 5/6/25 revealed an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE], readmitted [DATE] with the diagnosis that included: anxiety disorder (mental illness characterized by feelings of uneasiness, worry, and fear), Communication deficit (impairment in the ability to receive, send, process, and comprehend concepts of verbal, nonverbal communication), and dementia (loss of cognitive functioning - thinking, remembering, and reasoning - to such an extent…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Actual harm · Gcited before2025-05-08 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accident hazards and supervision, On 03/07/2025, Resident #1 was transferred by CNA (A) using a standing pivot transfer x 1 staff instead of a mechanical lift. During transfer, Resident #1 was injured, resulting in a laceration to the left lower calf requiring 13 stitches. The non-compliance was identified as past non-compliance. The PNC began on 3/7/25 and ended on 3/09/25. The facility had corrected the non-compliance before the survey began. This failure could lead to injury or death to residents. Findings included: Record review of Resident # 1's face sheet dated 5/6/25 revealed an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE], readmitted [DATE] with the diagnoses that included: anxiety disorder (mental illness characterized by feelings of uneasiness, worry, and fear. Communication…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · E2025-12-12 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
  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 consider the views of the resident or family group and act promptly upon the grievances and recommendations of such groups concerning issues of resident care and life in the facility or to demonstrate their response and rationale for such response for 1 of 1 Resident Council group reviewed. The facility failed to follow up on concerns and requests expressed in Resident Council meetings June 2025 through November 2025. The facility failed to provide the Resident Council group with a response, actions, and rationale taken regarding their concerns. This failure placed residents at risk of not having their grievances followed up and addressed. Findings included: Review of the Resident Advisory Council minutes from June 2025 to December 2025 reflected there was no documentation of the facility's responses to the following grievances: Review of document titled, Grievance Report Form dated 6/24/2025, reflected: Resident Council group communicated concerns…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-12-12 · tag F0865 — failed to run a quality-improvement (QAPI) program — pattern
  Have a plan that describes the process for conducting QAPI and QAA activities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement and maintain a comprehensive Quality Assurance & Performance Improvement Program (QAPI) Plan, disclose records upon request, and have governance and leadership for 1 of 1 QAPI Program Plan reviewed. The facility failed to maintain an effective, comprehensive QAPI program and plan that addresses the full range of services the facility provides. The facility failed to ensure the QAPI Program uses performance indicator data, resident and staff input, and other information to identify and prioritize problems and opportunities. The facility failed to identify and prioritize quality deficiencies and utilize Resident and Family Council minutes, Grievance Review process, and Daily QA meetings (Morning QA stand up meeting) for improving resident outcomes. This failure has the potential to impact residents' quality of life and resident rights. Findings included:Review of the Resident Advisory Council minutes reflected the following with no…

  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.

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-12 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — pattern
  Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, staff, and the public on 3 of 13 resident rooms (rooms 205, 206, 213) and 1of 1 hydration room and 1 of 1 laundry room reviewed for environmental concerns in that: 1-The facility failed to repair a bathroom ceiling vent that was dirty/rusty, replace a bathroom light bulb, repair a bedroom's broken window shade, repair a hydration room's ceiling, repair a laundry rooms ceiling vent and ceiling area, repair a laundry room's corner wall panel, clean a laundry room's corner wall area that had a film resembling mold, and replace laundry room floor tiles. These failures could place residents at risk of a diminished quality of life due to exposure to an environment that is unpleasant, unsanitary, and unsafe.The findings included: Observation on 12/11/25 from 1100am-1115am with the Administrator and Maintenance Director revealed the following:a-There was a bathroom ceiling vent that had dirt and rust on the vents in room # 205.b-There…

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

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-12 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment [TT1] for 2 of 24 residents (Residents #28 and #44) reviewed for care plan. 1. The facility failed to develop and implement a care plan with a focus, goals, and interventions for Resident #28's needs for dialysis (a life-sustaining medical treatment that filters waste products and excess fluid from the blood when the kidneys fail.) 2. The facility failed to develop and implement a care plan with a focus, goals, and interventions for Resident #44's needs for an intravenous catheter (a thin, flexible tube inserted into a vein to deliver fluids, medications, blood, or nutrition, and to draw blood, commonly placed in the hand or arm.) These failures could place residents at risk for…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-12 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure that residents' environments remained as free of accident hazards as possible and each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents, for 1 of 8 residents reviewed for anti-slip mats. Resident #9 was assessed as a fall risk with a history of falls from her wheelchair. Resident #9 was prescribed an anti-slip mat on the seat of her wheelchair and had gone missing for days. This failure could place residents at risk of falls and injuries. The findings included: A record review of Resident #9's admission record dated 12/10/2025 revealed an admission date of 3/21/2025 with diagnoses which included a history of falling, syncope and collapse (fainting), and difficulty walking. A record review of Resident #9's annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #9 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted for LTC and assistance with safety assistance and supervision related to her being assessed as a fall…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-12 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard 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 interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure medical records were maintained completely, accurately documented, readily accessible, and systematically organized per professional standards for 2 of 8 residents (Residents #9 and #76) reviewed for accurate medical records. Resident #76's hospital discharge documents were stored in Resident #9's medical record. This failure could place residents at risk of harm by keeping inaccurate records. The findings included:Resident #9A record review of Resident #9's admission record dated 12/10/2025 revealed an admission date of 3/21/2025 with diagnoses which included a history of falling, syncope and collapse (fainting), and difficulty walking. A record review of Resident #9's annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #9 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted for LTC and assistance with safety assistance and supervision related to her being assessed as a fall risk and history of falling. Resident #9 was assessed with a BIMS score of 12 out 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-05-08 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown sources were reported immediately to the administrator of the facility and to other officials, including to the State Survey Agency in accordance with State law through established procedures, for 1 of 3 Residents (Resident #1) reviewed for Neglect, The facility did not report an allegation of neglect per facility policy to the State Survey Agency (HHSC) when Resident # 1 received an injury to the left lateral calf occurred. This deficient practice could affect any resident and could contribute to further neglect. The findings were: Record review of Texas Unified Licensure Information Portal (TULIP) on 5/6/25 at 1:50 P.M. revealed no self-reported incidents regarding allegations of Neglect were reported for Resident # 1 . Record review of Resident # 1's face sheet dated 5/6/25 revealed an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-19 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #64) reviewed for assessments, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #64's Quarterly MDS assessment incorrectly documented the resident as not receiving hospice care. This failure could place residents at risk for inadequate care due to inaccurate assessments. The findings were: Record review of Resident #64's face sheet, dated 09/18/2023, revealed the resident was [AGE] years old with an admission date of 02/19/2024 and a readmission date of 05/25/2024, Resident #64's with diagnoses that included: Osteomyelitis(a serious infection of the bone that can be acute or chronic) , unspecified, Type II diabetes Mellitus with unspecified complications, End Stage Renal Disease. Record review of THHS Texas Medicaid Hospice Program Individual Election/Cancellation/Update Form 3071 revealed Resident #64 elected hospice services effective 05/14/2024. 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-09-19 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  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 received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices for 1 of 9 residents (Resident #34) reviewed for treatments and care related to enteral access devices. The facility failed to ensure medications were administered according to acceptable standards and practices related to enteral access devices when Resident #34's medications were not dissolved in water for administration with a flush between each medication administered. These failures could place residents with enteral access devices at risk of not receiving the intended therapeutic effects of medications, having medical complications, or complications related to utilization of enteral access devices, potentially leading to a decline in health and well-being. Findings included: Record review of the admission Record revealed Resident #34 was a [AGE] year-old…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-11 · tag F0641 — pattern
  Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure the assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 2 (Resident #1 and #2) of 5 residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was coded on his Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE] for a fall with major injury that occurred on 01/18/2024. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 was coded on her Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE] for a fall with major injury that occurred on 05/21/2024. This failure could place residents at risk of improper or incorrect care and services necessary for their physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. The findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #1's admission Record, dated 07/11/2024, reflected Resident #1 was admitted on [DATE] and was [AGE] years old. Resident #1 discharged on 04/21/2024 to another nursing home. Resident #1 had diagnoses of cerebral infarction (a disruption in the brain's blood flow), dementia (a general term for impaired…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“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.

Fines & penalties

$8,404 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $8,404 — penalty dated 2025-05-08

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to 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 →

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

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 74% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 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