Edinburg Nursing and Rehabilitation Center

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.

48.1% 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 36 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 54.2% 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 24 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 0.27 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 39% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% 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 98.4 residents a day — about 82% occupied, or roughly 22 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 2.81 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.16 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.76 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 2.53 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.93 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.17 to 0.14 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 36% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

32 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2026-01-01 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 4 resident (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents and supervision who had a vehicle on the facility premises. The facility failed to evaluate R#1s safety awareness and risks for elopement after multiple incidents of R#1 leaving the facility without staff awareness or supervision. On 10/27/2025 R#1 left the facility and returned driving a vehicle he had purchased in another city. On 11/27/2025, R#1 left the facility and was returned by police due to driving around lost. On 12/06/2025, R#1 left the facility without being signed out on pass and was found at a nearby facility. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 12/06/2025 and ended on 12/06/2025. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place residents at risk of sustaining accidents, injuries, and/or death.Findings…

  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
• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2023-11-21 · 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 Record review of Resident #11's admission record dated 10/25/23 documented a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 09/20/23. The form further documented Resident #11 with diagnoses including, unspecified dementia (a group of thinking and social symptoms that interfere with daily functioning), muscle wasting and atrophy (a decrease of muscle mass and strength), age-related physical debility (group of symptoms related to age that cause frailty), lack of coordination (group of symptoms that cause impaired direction) , and unspecified hearing loss (inability to hear). Resident #11 was not identified as her own responsible party. Record review of Resident #11's quarterly minimum data set (MDS) revealed a BIMS score of 99 indicating severe cognitive impairment. It further documented Resident #11 required a walker for mobility and required supervision when walking up to 10 feet. The MDS documented, Resident #11 did not use a wander/elopement alarm. Furthermore, the form documented 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Potential for harm · D2026-05-14 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to have the interdisciplinary team review and revise the comprehensive care plan after the completion of the quarterly review assessments for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 residents reviewed for care plan revision.The facility failed to complete a quarterly care plan for Resident #1.This failure could place the residents at risk of care and needs not being met.Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's admission record, dated 5/13/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted [DATE]. Resident #1's diagnoses included quadriplegia (a form of paralysis, resulting in the loss of movement and feeling to both arms and legs and torso), dysuria (pain when urinating), neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder (damage to the brain, spinal cord, or nerves disrupts the signals needed to store or empty urine properly), urinary catheterization (insertion of a hollow tube and into the bladder to drain urine), and hypertension (high blood pressure).Record review of 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-14 · 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 maintain medical records on each resident that were complete and accurately documented in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices for 2 of 5 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for medical records. 1. The facility failed to ensure LVN A documented accurate medication administration records for Resident #1 after medications and treatments were administered. 2. The facility failed to ensure LVN B documented accurate physician orders for Resident #2 after receiving telephone orders. This failure could place residents at risk for errors in care and treatment.Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #1's admission record, dated 5/13/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1's diagnoses included quadriplegia (a form of paralysis, resulting in the loss of movement and feeling to both arms and legs and torso), dysuria (pain when urinating), neuromuscular dysfunction 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 before2026-03-13 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to conduct a comprehensive and accurate assessment of each resident using the resident assessment instrument (RAI) specified by CMS for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) whose records were reviewed for assessments. Resident #1's MDS erroneously indicated her ADLs of sit to stand or chair/bed-to-chair transfer were not attempted due to medical condition or safety concerns. This failure to ensure comprehensive and accurate assessments could affect residents by placing them at risk for not receiving correct care and services.Findings include:Record review of Resident #1's admission record, dated 03/11/26, reflected a [AGE] year-old female with an admit date of 04/19/24 with diagnoses that included cerebral infarction due to embolism (blood clot or debris forms elsewhere (often the heart or neck arteries), travel to the brain and locks blood flow), osteoarthritis-left shoulder (a chronic degenerative joint disease where cartilage breaks down,…

  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 before2026-03-13 · 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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights, that included measurable objectives and time frames to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs, for 1 (Resident #5) of 6 residents reviewed for care plans.The facility failed to ensure Resident #5's care plan reflected his diet was no added salt, pureed texture, with nectar thickened liquids consistency.This failure could place the residents at risk of not receiving appropriate care to meet their needs.Findings included:Record review of Resident #5's face sheet, dated 03/11/26, reflected a [AGE] year-old male, admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: cerebral infarction (stroke), chronic heart failure, type 2 diabetes (high levels of blood sugar levels), dementia (decline in cognitive function, affecting memory, thinking, and behavior), urinary tract infection, hypertension (high blood pressure),…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-02-04 · 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 observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain clinical records on each resident that were complete and accurately documented in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for accuracy and completeness of clinical records. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 had an order for EBP (refers to an infection control intervention designed to reduce transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms that employs targeted gown and gloved use during high contact resident care activities). This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving nursing services by adequately trained nurses and could result in a decline in health.The findings included:Record review of Resident #1's admission record dated 02/04/26 reflected a [AGE] year-old female with an admit date of 01/14/26 an original admission date of 01/14/2021. Her relevant diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease (a progressive neurodegenerative disorder, causing…

  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 before2026-01-01 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect or exploitation were reported no later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury to the State Survey Agency where state law provides for jurisdiction in long-term care facilities in accordance with State law through established procedures for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #1), reviewed for freedom from abuse, neglect, and exploitation.The facility failed to report to the State Survey Agency (HHSC) an incident that occurred on 11/27/25 in which Resident #1 was returned to the facility by a police officer. Resident #1 had been driving around town in his own vehicle and did not know his way back to the facility. This failure could place residents at risk for abuse/neglect and could lead to a diminished quality of life and physical harm. Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 12/29/2025, revealed 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-12-08 · 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect the residents' rights to be free from abuse, neglect, and exploitation for four residents (Resident #2, Resident #6, Resident #9, and Resident #10) out of 5 residents reviewed for abuse. 1. The facility failed to protect Resident #6 and Resident #2 from both verbally and physically harming each other on [DATE]. Resident #6 and Resident #2 had a verbal altercation which turned physical on [DATE] in which Resident #6 ended up with a small skin tear to her hand. 2. The facility failed to protect Resident #2 and Resident #6 from both verbally and physically harming each other on [DATE]. Resident #2 and Resident #6 had a verbal altercation which turned physical on [DATE] in which Resident #2 ended up with a small scratch to her left arm. 3. The facility failed to protect Resident #9 when Resident #10 hit her with an electric wheelchair on [DATE], causing her to move backward, and creating a skin tear to her left calf. These failures…

  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 · Ecited before2025-12-08 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
  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 interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and time frames to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs for 3 of 5 residents (Resident #6, Resident #2, and Resident #5) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to develop care plans for Resident #6 and Resident #2 to include previous verbal altercations in the months leading up to when the physical altercations began between Resident #6 and Resident #2. The facility failed to include wound care for Resident #5's care plan for her surgical wound. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving person-centered care and/or services to meet their physical and/or psychosocial needs. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #6's face sheet, dated 10/08/2025, revealed a [AGE] year-old-female with an admission date of 01/15/2023. Pertinent diagnoses included Cerebral Infarction (most…

  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 before2025-12-08 · 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 interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure the assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 (Resident #5) of 5 residents reviewed for MDS assessment. Resident #5's MDS admission assessment dated [DATE] failed to indicate Resident #5 had a fall that resulted in major injury. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for inadequate care and services to meet their needs based on inaccurate MDS assessments. Findings included:Record review of Resident #5's admission assessment reflected an [AGE] year-old female initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included displaced intertrochanteric fracture of left femur (a break in the top of the thigh bone), history of falling, cognitive communication deficit (difficulty with communication), vascular dementia (problems with thought processes and memory caused by brain damage from impaired blood flow), hyperlipidemia (high cholesterol), atherosclerotic heart disease (buildup 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 before2025-12-08 · 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 observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain clinical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices complete and accurately documented medical records for 1 (Resident #7) of 10 residents whose records were reviewed. Clinical medical staff failed to ensure that Resident #7 suprapubic catheter output log was accurately documented as order by her physician. This failure could place residents of having incomplete and inaccurate records which could impact their treatment and health when receiving suprapubic catheter care. The findings include: Record review of Resident #7's face sheet revealed a [AGE] year-old-female initially admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of Neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder (the nerves that carry messages back and forth between the bladder and the spinal cord and brain don't work the way they should.), chronic combined systolic and diastolic congestive heart failure (Systolic heart failure, heart isn't contracting well during…

  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

$16,565 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $9,113 — penalty dated 2026-01-01
• $7,452 — penalty dated 2023-11-21

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 WELLSENTIAL HEALTH — 67 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 43 rows in the source record cover these 32 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

12 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.

About 76% 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