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

Fairfield Nursing & Rehabilitation Center

420 Moody St, Fairfield, TX 75840 · Government - Hospital district · 101 certified beds · (903) 389-1236 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (903) 389-1236 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citations — no harm found (F0604, F0609) — most recent Sep 2024Resident-funds citation (F0565)
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (97%) runs well above the national median (45%)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 5 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
106 N Keechi St · (903) 389-6112 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
300 W US-84 · (903) 389-2455 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
414 W Bond St · (903) 388-9845 · Call to confirm hours
Park
(903) 389-2633 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 5 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased18.9%15.8%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight0.0%3.0%5.4%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.3%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%0.8%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.4%2.4%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury7.3%3.3%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened13.8%14.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication15.7%18.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.2%3.8%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control18.9%13.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table15.2%9.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.7%1.5%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%88.0%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission29.7%25.7%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit6.7%12.3%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.932.171.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.872.061.80worse

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

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

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

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

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

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

52.7% 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 47 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

52.7%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
64.3%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.35U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.14hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.19hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 64.3% 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 28 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 0.35 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 59% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF52.7%CMS range 42.1–63.351.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.2%CMS range 6.4–14.210.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge64.3%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge67.9%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge50.0%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified93.5%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge90.9%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened4.3%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.1%CMS range 3.7–14.07.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.041.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.39
RN hours/ resident / day
1.03
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.66
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.09
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.27
RN hoursweekends
96.7%
Total nursing turnover
100.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 101 beds and averages 69.3 residents a day — about 69% occupied, or roughly 32 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 3.09 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.39 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.66 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 2.78 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.22 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.44 to 0.27 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 97% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-12-18)
1
at the previous standard inspection (2024-09-26)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

10 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · E2025-12-18 · 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

    Based on interviews and record reviews, 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 reviewed.The facility failed to follow up on concerns and requests expressed in resident council meetings from July 2025 through November 2025. This failure placed residents at risk of not having their preferences honored.Review of Resident Council minutes from 07/05/2025 to 12/09/2025 reflected the following Resident council grievances did not have a facility's responses: *7/05/ 2025 minutes reflected: Nursing review concerns: When getting showers, beds still not getting stripped. When answering call lights aides come & leave without helping, not putting call lights in reach.It was reported residents did not receive scheduled showers. Staff completed showers at their convenience, and residents had to ask for showers. Fresh water not provided…

    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 · E2025-12-18 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to properly store, prepare, and distribute food under sanitary conditions in accordance with standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen. 1. The facility failed to ensure Dietary Aide A wore proper hair restraint when holding clean plates in the dishwashing room.2. The facility failed to ensure the Dietary Manager wore a beard guard when standing next to the food prep table. 3. The facility failed to ensure Dietary Aide A sanitized his hands prior to donning gloves after touching his clothes.Findings include: Observations on 12/16/2025 at 9:05 AM, Dietary Aide A was wearing a baseball cap when he was holding clean plates in the dishwasher room in the kitchen. He had approximately 12 inches of hair in a ponytail not covered by the baseball cap. Interview on 12/16/2025 at 9:09 AM, Dietary Aide A stated he was informed by the Dietary Manager to cover his ponytail with a hair net. He stated he forgot, and he was expected to have all of his hair covered when in the kitchen. Dietary Aide A stated there was…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-28 · tag F0552 — isolated
    Ensure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
    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 resident has the right to be informed of, and participate in, his or her treatment including the right to be informed in advance, by the physician or other practitioner or professional, of the risks and benefits of the risks and benefits of proposed care, of treatment and treatment alternatives or treatment options and to choose the alternative or option he or she prefers for 1 of 5 (Resident #1) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was sent out to the hospital when Resident #1 complained of pain in her lower back on 07/17/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of their rights to have their medical needs met . Findings include:A record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 07/26/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1's diagnoses which included unspecified dementia (memory loss), major depressive disorder (sadness), diabetes (too much sugar in the blood) 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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-28 · 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 ensure, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, medical records were maintained on each resident that were complete and accurately documented for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) for complete and accurate records. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's weight was documented in PCC for July 2025. This failure could place residents at risk for the possibility of not verifying the needed care and services to meet their needs. Findings include:A record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 07/26/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1's had diagnoses which included unspecified dementia (memory loss), major depressive disorder (sadness), diabetes (too much sugar in the blood) and hypertension (high blood pressure) A record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 06/23/2025, reflected the resident had a BIMS score of 8, which indicated moderate cognitive…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-26 · 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

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all allegations of abuse are reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, to the Administrator of the facility and to HHSC for one (Resident #4) of five residents reviewed for abuse. The facility staff failed to immediately report an allegation of abuse to the Administrator and to HHSC as required when Resident #4 was struck in the face by Resident #3 on 08/20/2024 at 8:30 p.m This failure could place residents at risk for unreported allegations of abuse. Findings included: Record review of the facility EHR reflected nurses note dated 08/20/24 at 8:30p.m. stated that Resident #3 struck Resident #4 in the face at 8:30 p.m. on 08/20/24. The facility staff was present in the area and intervened. The residents were separated and assessed for injuries. Resident #3 was placed on 1:1 supervision by staff. Resident #4 was monitored as part of the assessment. The facility Administrator was not made aware of the incident until a 6:45 a.m. on 08/21/2024. The report was made at…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designated to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable disease and infection for 1 (Residents #1) of 3 residents reviewed for infection control in that: 1. CNA A failed to change their soiled gloves and wash hands during incontinent care for Resident #1. These failures could place residents at-risk of cross contamination which could result in infections or illness. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's EHR on 09/24/24 revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old female that was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Polyarthritis (arthritis that affects all joints),and mixed incontinence (both urine and bowel incontinence). Review of Resident #1's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 7/02/24, reflected a BIMS score of 9, indicating the resident was moderately impaired cognitively, 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-14 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
    Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from physical restraints, not required to treat the resident's symptoms, for 1 of 9 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for physical restraints. The facility failed to ensure RP #2 was educated on physical restraint policy and refrained from having tied Resident #1's right hand/wrist to her bed's assist bar with a blanket. This failure placed residents at risk of physical harm, psychosocial harm, and having their needs gone unmet. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's AR, dated 8/14/2024, reflected an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. She was diagnosed with Dementia (which was a disease that affected memory, thought, and interfered with daily life,) Cerebral infarction (which was a pathologic process that resulted in necrotic tissue in the brain, caused by disrupted oxygen and blood supply,) and Bullous Pemphigoid (which was a rare skin condition that caused blisters on 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-14 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse were reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, for 1 of 9 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for reporting abuse allegations. The facility failed to report an incident involving the use of a restraint on Resident #1 by RP #2, that occurred on 8/3/2024 at 8:35 PM, until 8/5/2024 to Health and Human Service. This failure placed residents at risk of physical harm, psychosocial harm, lack of regulatory oversite, and having their needs gone unmet. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's AR, dated 8/14/2024, reflected an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. She was diagnosed with Dementia (which was a disease that affected memory, thought, and interfered with daily life,) Cerebral infarction (which was a pathologic process that resulted in necrotic tissue in the brain, caused by disrupted oxygen and blood supply,) and Bullous…

    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 · E2023-07-26 · 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 assures the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of medications for 1 of 3 medication carts (nurse cart hall 300) and failed to establish a system of records of receipt and disposition of all controlled drugs in sufficient detail to enable an accurate reconciliation for 7 of 9 months (October 2022, February 2023, March 2023, April 2023, May 2023, June 2023, and July 2023) reviewed for pharmacy services. 1. The facility failed to remove expired insulin from the nurse medication cart on hall 300 for Resident #36. 2. The facility failed to remove expired medications from the nurse medication cart on hall 300 for Resident #64. 3. The facility failed have a licensed pharmacist and two witnesses initial the attached pages of the controlled medication destruction inventory sheets. These failures could place residents who receive medications at risk of not…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-07-26 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — pattern
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5 percent. There were 3 errors out of 42 opportunities, resulting in a 7.14 percent medication error involving 3 of 9 residents (Resident #17, Resident #19, and Resident #70) reviewed for medication pass. LVN C failed to administer the ordered dose of Vitamin D3 to Resident # 17. LVN D failed to administer the ordered water flush with medication administration through a feeding tube for Resident # 19. LVN C failed to administer the ordered dose of Vitamin D3 to Resident # 70. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving the intended therapeutic benefit of their medications or receiving them as prescribed, per physician orders Findings: 1. Record review of facility face sheet dated 7/26/2023 indicated Resident #17 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to facility on 09/25/2022 with diagnosis of schizophrenia (mental illness). During a medication pass observation on 7/25/2023 at…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 52.1+1.9 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 52.7+2.3 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 51.1-0.1 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 53.2-0.2 vs chain
The other 148 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.1★, per CMS)
1 of 5Afton Oaks Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterHouston, TX 1 of 5Arlington Heights Health and Rehabilitation CenterFort Worth, TX 1 of 5Beltline Healthcare CenterGarland, TX 1 of 5Bluebonnet Nursing & RehabilitationKarnes City, TX 1 of 5Bluebonnet Point WellnessBullard, TX 1 of 5Brentwood Terrace Healthcare And RehabilitationParis, TX 1 of 5Buena Vida Nursing and Rehab-San AntonioSan Antonio, TX 1 of 5Cottonwood Nursing & RehabilitationDenton, TX 1 of 5Countryview Nursing & RehabilitationTerrell, TX 1 of 5Dogwood Trails ManorWoodville, TX 1 of 5Downtown Health and Rehabilitation CenterFort Worth, TX 1 of 5Estates Healthcare and Rehabilitation CenterFort Worth, TX 1 of 5Fair Park Health & Rehabilitation CenterDallas, TX 1 of 5Five Points Nursing & Rehabilitation of College StCollege Station, TX 1 of 5Five Points at Lake Highlands Nursing and RehabDallas, TX 1 of 5Five Points of PflugervillePflugerville, TX 1 of 5Franklin Heights Nursing & RehabilitationEl Paso, TX 1 of 5Gilmer Nursing & RehabilitationGilmer, TX 1 of 5Grace Pointe Wellness CenterEl Paso, TX 1 of 5Graham Oaks Care CenterGraham, TX 1 of 5Granbury Care CenterGranbury, TX 1 of 5Greenhill VillasMount Pleasant, TX 1 of 5Heritage At Longview Healthcare CenterLongview, TX 1 of 5Huebner Creek Health & Rehabilitation CenterSan Antonio, TX 1 of 5Interlochen Health and Rehabilitation CenterArlington, TX 1 of 5Kenedy Health & RehabilitationKenedy, TX 1 of 5Kennedy Health & RehabLufkin, TX 1 of 5Lake Lodge Nursing & RehabilitationLake Worth, TX 1 of 5Lampstand Nursing and RehabilitationBryan, TX 1 of 5Lancaster Nursing & RehabilitationLancaster, TX 1 of 5Marine Creek Nursing & RehabilitationFort Worth, TX 1 of 5Mesa Vista Inn Health CenterSan Antonio, TX 1 of 5Mountain View Health & RehabilitationEl Paso, TX 1 of 5Navasota Nursing & RehabilitationNavasota, TX 1 of 5Normandy Terrace Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterSan Antonio, TX 1 of 5North Pointe Nursing and RehabilitationWatauga, TX 1 of 5Park Place Care CenterGeorgetown, TX 1 of 5Parkview Manor Nursing and RehabilitationWeimar, TX 1 of 5Peach Tree PlaceWeatherford, TX 1 of 5Pebble Creek Nursing CenterEl Paso, TX

Showing 40 of 148; lowest-rated first.

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
LIBERTY COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT NO 1Organization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 05/01/2022
FREGIA, MILTONIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/07/2022
GARDNER, SHANNONIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 08/22/2022
GARDZINA, MARGARETIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 02/26/2024
HENRY, PAULIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODYsince 05/09/2009
STRATTON, CHARLESIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 05/01/2005
WILLIG, ZACHARYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2025
HUGGINS, LINDAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 05/01/2022
FAIRFIELD I ENTERPRISES, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2022
BLAKE, GARYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2022
BLAKE, MALISAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 05/01/2022
LEWIS, BETTYIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 04/11/2025
WHITE, DARRYLIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 04/11/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$6.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-1.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 63%Medicare 7%Other / private 30%

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

$224per resident / day
operating cost
$6,807per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$220per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in TX

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Texas Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Texas
$5,627/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$7,604/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,666/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 676123. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-18, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next