Cross Timbers Rehabilitation and Healthcare 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.

46.2% 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 78 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 40.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 35 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 0.25 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 34% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 7% 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 90.9 residents a day — about 76% occupied, or roughly 29 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 3.71 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.548 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.39 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 3.45 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.82 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.50 to 0.68 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 50% 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.

24 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 13 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-09-11 · 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 each resident received adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was provided with adequate supervision to prevent him from eloping from the facility on 05/05/25. He was found down the street away from the facility and was brought back by the local police department. The noncompliance was identified as past noncompliance. The Immediate Jeopardy began on 05/05/24 and ended on 05/06/24. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the investigation began. This failure could place residents who require supervision at risk of harm, severe injury, and possible death. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 09/16/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. He had a BIMS (mental status assessment) score of 09…

  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 · D2026-04-16 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
  Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide residents with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences except when to do so would endanger the health or safety of the resident or other residents for two (Resident #15 and Resident #65) of six residents reviewed for call lights. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #15's call light was not underneath her bed pillows so that she could contact staff for assistance to remove bed covers for her. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #65's call light was accessible so that she could request her catheter to be emptied. This failure could place the residents at risk of falling, further injury, and unnecessary pain from not being able to call for help. Findings included:1. Record review of Resident #15's Comprehensive MDS Assessment, dated 03/11/26, reflected [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a BIMS of 10 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #15 had the following…

  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 · D2026-04-16 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolated
  Provide appropriate foot care.
  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 receive proper treatment and care to maintain good foot health by providing foot care and treatment, in accordance with professional standards of practice, including to prevent complications from the resident's medical condition for 1 of 19 resident (Resident #8) reviewed for foot care.The facility failed to ensure Resident #8's toenails were trimmed.This failure had the potential to affect place residents by placing them at risk for poor personal hygiene, odors and a decline in their quality of life. Findings included:Record review of Resident #8's 5-day MDS assessment dated [DATE], revealed the resident was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #8 had diagnoses which included metabolic encephalopathy (brain dysfunction), muscle wasting and atrophy (the loss or thinning of muscle tissue), depression (mood disorder), Non-Alzheimer's Dementia (problems with memory and thinking), hypertension…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-16 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  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 on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who is incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections based on the resident's comprehensive assessment for 1 of 3 residents (Residents #65) reviewed for urine incontinence/catheters. The facility failed to ensure Resident #65's catheter urine collection bags were emptied in a timely manner. This failure could place residents with catheters at risk of infections and loss of dignity. Findings included: Record review of Resident #65's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 04/04/26, reflected [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a BIMS of 09 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #15 had the following diagnoses: Heart Failure (chronic condition where the heart muscle is unable to pump enough blood to meet the body's needs), high blood pressure (force of blood against the artery wall is consistently too high), Renal Insufficiency (kidney…

  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 · D2026-04-16 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for 2 (Resident #59 and Resident #61) of 3 residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #59 and Resident #61 received adequate oxygen to maintain their O2 sat above 92 % per physician's orders. This failure could place residents who receive oxygen therapy at risk of receiving inadequate oxygen support, which could result in serious harm. Findings included: 1.Record review of Resident #59's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE], revealed at [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's BIMS score was 14, which indicated intact cognition. The MDS Assessment under Section GG-Functional Abilities, reflected Resident #4 required moderate assistance with most self-care ADLs. The MDS Assessment under Section I-Active Diagnoses, reflected Resident #59's…

  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 · D2026-04-16 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolated
  Provide timely, quality laboratory services/tests to meet the needs of residents.
  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 laboratory services to meet the needs of its residents for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for laboratory services. The facility failed to provide proper monitoring of Resident #4's immunodeficiency disorder by not completing routine specialized laboratory services to ensure that treatment remained effective. This failure could place residents at risk of a delay in medical evaluation and treatment, which could result in worsening of conditions or serious harm. Findings included: Record review of Resident #4's Annual MDS Assessment, dated 03/20/26, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's BIMS score was 15, which indicated intact cognition. The MDS Assessment under Section GG-Functional Abilities, reflected Resident #4 was independent with all self-care ADLs. The MDS Assessment under Section I-Active Diagnoses, reflected Resident # 4's active diagnoses…

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

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-04-16 · 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 establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 5 resident rooms (Resident #15's room) reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to remove and dispose of Resident #15's wound care trash and debris, which included a cup of gauze soaked with betadine and used wound care debris trash, from Resident #15's bedside table. This failure could place residents at risk of exposure to communicable diseases and infections.Findings included:Record review of Resident #15's Comprehensive MDS Assessment, dated 03/11/26, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a BIMS of 10 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS reflected Resident #15 had the following diagnoses: stroke (sudden interruption of blood…

  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 · D2026-02-26 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for care plans.The facility failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan for Resident #1 that addressed her religious dietary restrictions.This failure could lead to the residents' personal choices and desires not being met. Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 12/18/25, reflected that Resident #1 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included stroke affecting the resident's vision, Asperger's syndrome (form of Autism with social and communication issues), and diabetes. Her Functional Abilities assessment indicated she used 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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-11-21 · tag F0554 — isolated
  Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the interdisciplinary team determined if a resident was able to self-administer medications d for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for resident rights. The facility's interdisciplinary team failed to ensure Resident #1 was clinically appropriate to self-administer Systane ophthalmic eyedrops that were at the resident's bedside. The failure had the potential to place residents at risk for unsafe drug administration. Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's admission MDS, dated [DATE], reflected Resident #1 was an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1's BIMS score of 14, which indicated his cognition was intact. Resident #1's MDS was pending completion. Record review of Resident #1's Baseline Care Plan, admission date 10/04/25, reflected Section D. Medications revealed Resident #1 was not able to self-administer any medications. Record review of Resident #1's clinical records…

  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 · E2025-01-24 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — pattern
  Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
  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 residents who required dialysis received such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for 2 of 2 residents (Residents #26 and #245) reviewed for dialysis. The facility failed to ensure dialysis communication forms for Residents #26 and Resident #245 were received back after returning from dialysis treatment. This failure could place residents at risk of inadequate communication between the facility and dialysis center. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #26's admission MDS assessment, dated 01/12/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #26 had a diagnosis of end stage renal disease (a chronic condition that occurs when the kidneys can no longer filter waste from the blood and requires long-term dialysis). She had a BIMS score of 13, which indicated her…

  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 · E2025-01-24 · 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 assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident on one of three medication carts (200) and 2 of 19 residents (Residents #1, #3, and #190) reviewed for pharmacy services. 1. The facility failed to ensure the 200 Hall nurses' medication cart contained accurate narcotic logs for Resident #1 and #3. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #190's physician order for Lomotil was followed when Hospice Nurse G faxed the order on 01/20/25 to the facility, and it was not put in the system until 01/22/25. These failures could place residents at risk for medication errors, drug diversion, and delay in medication administration. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident# 1's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 01/08/25, reflected the resident was [AGE] year-old female readmitted to the facility on…

  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.

Fines & penalties

$8,281 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $8,281 — penalty dated 2025-09-11

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 NEXION HEALTH — 51 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 10 rows in the source record cover these 9 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.

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