Denton Village by PureHealth

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.

60.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 209 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 70.5% 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 112 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 0.48 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 79% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% 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 88 beds and averages 68.4 residents a day — about 78% occupied, or roughly 20 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.55 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.67 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.77 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 3.16 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.70 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.59 to 0.87 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 41% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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.

26 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 15 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · K2025-11-18 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — pattern
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident had the right to be free from neglect as defined in this subpart for one (Resident #1) of six residents reviewed for neglect. 1. On [DATE] LVN B failed to notify Resident #1's doctor or hospice provider after she checked Resident #1's BS level of 576; and on [DATE] and [DATE] LVN B failed to notify Resident #1's doctor or hospice provider after she checked Resident #1's BS levels over 600. 2. On [DATE] and [DATE] the facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was given his dayshift dose of his diabetic Metformin medications to prevent his BS level from getting higher and on [DATE] the facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received his dayshift dose of his potassium chloride medication. (There was no evidence provided that the facility contacted the pharmacy, doctor, hospice or obtained the medications from the E-kit or checked Resident #1's BS Levels). 3. On [DATE] RN A failed to check Resident #1's BS after Resident #1…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-18 · 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 each assessment accurately reflected the resident's status and for each individual who completed a portion of the assessment must sign and certify the accuracy of that portion of the assessment for one (Resident #1) of six residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's admission MDS Assessments was complete and accurate. Resident #1 was a diabetic who took diabetic medications and he had no diabetes diagnosis listed on this assessment. This failure could place all residents at risk of inadequate care if all of their diagnoses were not included in the residents' records, which could result in a decline in the residents' health and psych-social well-being. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed an [AGE] year-old male who admitted [DATE] from home, had a BIMS score of 00 (Severe cognitive impairment) and active diagnoses that included debility and…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-11-18 · 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 interview and record review the facility failed to, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, the facility must maintain medical records on each resident that were complete and accurately documented for one (Resident #1) of six residents reviewed for medical records. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's face sheet and care plans were complete and accurate. Resident #1 was diagnosed with diabetes and took diabetic medications and he had no diabetes diagnosis on his facility's EMR records. This failure could place all residents at risk of inadequate care if all of their diagnoses were not included in the resident's EMR records, which could result in a decline in the resident's health and psych-social well-being. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet dated 11/14/25 revealed an [AGE] year-old male who admitted [DATE] with diagnoses of Acute on chronic systolic (Congestive) heart failure, Peripheral vascular disease, stage 3 chronic kidney disease,…

  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 · E2025-09-19 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — pattern
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who were incontinent with bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infection for three (Resident #8, Resident #15, and Resident #21) of three residents reviewed for incontinent care. 1. The facility failed to ensure that CNA F performed the right technique during Resident #8's incontinent care on 09/18/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure that CNA F performed the right technique during Resident #15's incontinent care on 09/18/2025. 3. The facility failed to ensure that CNA E performed the right technique during resident #21's incontinent care on 09/18/2025. This failure could place residents at risk for urinary tract infection. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #8's Face Sheet, dated 09/18/2025, reflected an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with cystitis (inflammation of the bladder) with hematuria (blood in the urine) and…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-09-19 · tag F0700 — pattern
  Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation ,interview and record reviews the facility failed to ensure informed consent prior to installation. The facility failed to ensure Resident #5, #9, #10, #11, #30, and #46 had physician orders for the pivot assist bars attached to the residents' bed. This failure could place residents at risk of having unnecessary equipment installed on their beds .Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #5's Face Sheet, dated 09/18/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with muscle weakness and Alzheimer's disease (cognitive decline). Record review of Resident #5's Comprehensive MDS Assessment, dated 08/15/25, reflected the resident had severe cognitive impairment with a BIMS score of 3. The Comprehensive MDS Assessment indicated that the resident had an active diagnosis of muscle weakness. Record review of Resident #5's Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 09/09/25, reflected the resident had a history of falls, with his last 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 · Ecited before2025-09-19 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — pattern
  Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services, including procedures that assured the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals that met the needs of each resident for four (Resident #4, Resident #7, Resident #21, and Resident #61) of twenty residents reviewed for pharmaceutical services. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4 was not self-administering her pain ointment without an assessment on 09/17/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7 was not self-administering some medications without an assessment on 09/17/2025. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #21 was not self-administering her morning medications without an assessment on 09/17/2025. 4. The facility failed to ensure Resident #61 was not self-administering her eye drops without an assessment on 09/17/2025. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving medications as ordered, potential overdose, and adverse…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-09-19 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to, 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 eight (Residents #4, #7, #8, #21, #23, #31, #51, and #61) of eighteen residents reviewed for medication storage. 1. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #4's pain ointment was not inside the room on 09/17/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #7's TUMS, eye drops, and oral analgesia were not inside the room on 09/17/2025. 3. The facility failed to ensure that a wound cleanser was not left inside Resident #8's room on 09/17/2025. 4. The facility failed to ensure Resident #21's medication was not left inside the room on 09/17/2025 and 09/18/2025. 5. The facility failed to ensure that a tube of zinc oxide (medicated cream used to prevent skin irritation) was not left inside Resident #23's room on 09/17/2025. 6. The…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-09-19 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen, reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to ensure frozen food items were properly labeled and dated when stored in the freezer. The facility failed to ensure open food products requiring refrigeration were stored appropriately after opening. Failure to store open, perishable food products requiring refrigeration appropriately after opening may lead to the growth of harmful bacteria, increasing the risk of foodborne illness among residents.Tag: F812/N4363S/S= E Surveyor Name(s): Joycelynn [NAME] Supervisor: [NAME] Findings include:[SP1] [JB2] Observations on 09/17/25 from 9:15 AM to 9:30 AM in the facility's only kitchen revealed: One large sealed bag of frozen French fries, located in the freezer, was not labeled with the date stored. One large sealed package of beef, which…

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

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-09-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based 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 fifteen residents (Resident #8, Resident #15, Resident #21, and Resident #37) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA F performed hand hygiene and changed her gloves during Resident #8's incontinent care on 09/18/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure CNA F performed hand hygiene and changed her gloves during Resident #15's incontinent care on 09/18/2025. 3. The facility failed to ensure CNA E performed hand hygiene and changed his gloves during Resident #21's incontinent care on 09/18/2025. 4. The facility failed to ensure RN B wore a gown while giving Resident #37's formula via g-tube, who had an order for enhanced barrier protection, on 09/18/2025. These failures could place…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-19 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #46) reviewed for dignity. CNA E failed to honor Resident #46's request to adjust the straps wrapped around the resident's leg, which was holding the catheter bag in place, when she advised it was too tight. This failure placed residents at risk of not having their right to a dignified existence and self-determination maintained and led Resident #46 to feeling frustrated and ignored.Findings included: Record review of Resident #46's Face Sheet, dated 09/17/25, reflected an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #46 had diagnosis of urinary and flaccid neuropathic bladder (weak bladder muscles). Record review of Resident #46's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 09/09/25, reflected Resident #46 had 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-19 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolated
  Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's right to personal privacy during medical treatment for two (Resident #21 and Resident #37) of eight residents reviewed for resident rights. 1. The facility failed to ensure the LVN D closed Resident #21's door while checking her blood sugar on 09/18/2025 2. The facility failed to ensure RN B closed Resident #37's while providing his bolus feeding via g-tube (gastrostomy feeding tube: a tube that is surgically inserted through the skin of the belly and into the stomach) on 09/18/2025. These failures could place the residents at risk of not having their personal privacy maintained while treatment was provided. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #21's Face Sheet, dated 09/18/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus (high blood sugar). Record review of Resident #21's Quarterly 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.

  Resident Rights 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

$55,112 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $55,112 — penalty dated 2025-09-19

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 PUREHEALTH — 8 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

CMS files one row per role, so the 15 rows in the source record cover these 11 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $2.1M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 16% 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