Arbor Lake Nursing & Rehabilitation, LLC

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.

47.7% 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 55 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 69.4% 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 36 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 23% 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 123 beds and averages 85.9 residents a day — about 70% occupied, or roughly 37 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 3.11 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.62 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.92 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 2.76 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.25 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.61 to 0.63 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 53% 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.

33 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · J2025-04-15 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
  Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remains as free of accident hazards as is possible for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was free from accidents/hazards on 03/16/25 when she was shocked after plugging in her phone charger to the wall socket, that resulted in burns to her fingers and hand. An IJ was identified on 04/14/25. The IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 4:03 PM. While the IJ was removed on 04/15/25, the facility remained out of compliance at a scope of isolated and a severity level of potential for more than minimal harm because the facility was continuing to monitor the implementation and effectiveness of their Plan of Removal. This failure could expose residents to risk of injury or death from electrical shock. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's admission Record, dated 04/14/2025, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female…

  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
• Actual harm · G2025-07-25 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  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 ensure residents had the right to be free from abuse for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #33) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to ensure residents were free resident-to-resident abuse when Resident #33 entered Resident #21's room, and Resident #21 pushed Resident #33 down. Resident #33 sustained abrasions on his nose and right knee. The failure placed residents at risk for abuse. Findings included:Record review of Resident #33's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], reflected Resident #33 was a [AGE] year-old male, who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease (a progressive disease that destroys memory and other important mental functions), non-Alzheimer's dementia (encompasses a variety of progressive neurological disorders that cause cognitive decline, but are distinct from Alzheimer's disease), bipolar disorder (a disorder associated with episodes of mood swings ranging from depressive lows to manic…

  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
• Actual harm · G2025-07-25 · tag F0744 — failed to care for residents with dementia — isolated
  Provide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with dementia.
  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 displays or was diagnosed with dementia, receives the appropriate treatment and services to attain or maintain his or her highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #33) reviewed for dementia services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #33 was provided with treatment and services to address his wandering behaviors related to his diagnosis of dementia which resulted in the resident entering Resident #21's room and being pushed by Resident #1. Upon being pushed, Resident #33's face/head bumped Resident #21's dresser, and Resident #33 sustained abrasions on his nose and right knee. This failure puts residents with dementia at increased risk of not having their dementia-related needs met. Findings included: Record review of Resident #33's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], reflected Resident #33 was a [AGE] year-old male, who admitted to the facility on [DATE].…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-05-19 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — pattern
  Make sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
  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 maintain an effective pest control program for 1 of 1 kitchen to keep it free of flies. The facility failed to ensure the kitchen was free of flies on 05/19/26. This failure could affect residents who eat from the kitchen placing them at risk for the potential spread of infection and decreased quality of life.Findings included: Observation on 05/19/26 at 10:45 AM of the facility's kitchen revealed there were 7 flies, 5 of the flies were on a cord of the food processor that was plugged into the outlet, 1 fly was on the outlet, and another fly was observed on the leg of the prep table while 3 staff members prepared lunch. Review of the Pest Control for March, April, and May 2025, reflected they made routine visits and flies had not been a targeted pest.Interview on 05/19/26 at 10:54 AM with Dietary Aide A revealed the flies came into the kitchen through the back door when they opened the door to take the trash out. Dietary Aide A said the number of flies in the kitchen depended on the weather outside, but she…

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

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-09-08 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
  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 act as a fiduciary of the residents' funds and hold, safeguard, manage and account for the personal funds of the resident deposited with the facility for nine (Residents #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8 and #9) of nine residents reviewed for resident trust accounts. The facility did not monitor resident trust fund account balances to ensure funds did not exceed Medicaid resource limits. The facility allowed Residents #1, # 2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8 and #9 trust funds to remain over $3,000, which placed them at risk of losing their Medicaid eligibility. This deficient practice could affect all residents with a resident trust account by placing their Medicaid eligibility at risk and becoming ineligible for nursing facility care, financial hardship, and possible involuntary discharge for nonpayment. Findings included:1. Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet dated 09/08/25 reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-25 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  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 housekeeping and maintenance services necessary to maintain a sanitary and comfortable interior for 2 of 17 residents (Residents #3 and Resident #13) reviewed for environment. 1.The facility failed to maintain a comfortable or private homelike environment for Residents #3 and #13. These failures placed residents at risk of decreased feelings of self-worth, increased harm and an impersonalized homelike environment. Findings included:1. Observation on 07/22/2025 at 11:37 AM revealed Resident #3 had broken blinds. The blinds were missing the end pieces of approximately 4 blinds leaving an area of approximately 6 inches by 10 inches without blinds. Observation on 07/23/2025 at 9:20 AM revealed Resident #3 had broken blinds. The blinds were still missing the end pieces of approximately 4 blinds leaving an area of approximately 6 inches by 10 inches without blinds. Observation and interview on 07/23/2025 at 1:49 PM with CNA C revealed…

  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 · Ecited before2025-07-25 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  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 unable to carry out activities of daily living receives the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 2 of 5 residents (Resident #19 and Resident #59) reviewed for ADL care.The facility failed to provide Resident #19 and Resident #59 assistance with grooming and nail care. Resident #19 and Resident #59's nails were observed to be about half inch long with black debris under nails on both hands. Both resident's appearance was disheveled with their clothing and uncleaned hair. This failure could place the residents at risk for decreased feelings of self-worth and infection. 1.Record review of Resident #19's face sheet, dated 07/25/25, revealed Resident #19 was a [AGE] year-old male originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], readmitted [DATE] and current admission date of 01/14/25.Record review of Resident #19's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 04/14/25, revealed…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-25 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to 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 disease and infection for 2 (Resident #76 and #96) of 3 residents reviewed for infection control during medication administration.The facility failed to ensure MA E disinfected the blood pressure cuff in between blood pressure checks for Resident #98 and Resident #76. RN D failed to wear a gown while providing care for Resident #96, who was on enhanced barrier precautions for Gastronomy tube. These failures could place residents at-risk of cross contamination which could result in infections or illness.Findings included:1.Review of Resident #76's MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #76 had diagnoses which included hypertension (high blood pressure) and heart failure (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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-24 · tag F0627 — isolated
  Ensure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/discharge.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY The facility failed to provide a 30-day written notice of discharge as well as discharge planning for 1 of 14 residents reviewed for discharge planning. * The failure to provide a 30-day written discharge notice and discharge planning could result in residents experiencing psychosocial harm due to inappropriate discharges and placed residents at risk of being discharged without alternate placement and not having access to available advocacy services, discharge/transfer options, and denying them their rights in the appeal process. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 5/24/25, indicated a [AGE] year-old male who originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #1 had a diagnosis of type 2 Diabetes (when the body can't use insulin properly, causing sugar to build up in the blood), cognitive communication deficit (trouble thinking, understanding, or expressing themselves due to problems with the brain), and atherosclerotic heart disease (when the arteries…

  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 · D2025-04-15 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure that an alleged violation involving neglect, or injuries of unknown source were reported immediately for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents. LVN A failed to immediately report an incident to the Administrator i nvolving Resident #1 on 03/16/25 when she alleged she was shocked after plugging in her phone charger to the wall. Resident #1 sustained a charred mark to her finger and blisters to her finger and thumb from the incident. This failure could have caused residents to suffer cardiac issues. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's admission Record, dated 04/14/2025, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 03/18/25. Record review of Resident #1's admission MDS Assessment, dated 03/04/25, reflected she had a BIMS score of 15, indicating no cognitive impairment. Her active diagnoses included cerebrovascular accident (CVA), transient ischemic attack…

  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 · D2025-04-15 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's choices for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received treatment after she sustained blisters to her fingers on 03/16/25 after coming into contact with an electrical outlet in her room that sparked and caused scorching on the outlet and surrounding wall area. The failure placed residents at risk of delay treatment. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's admission Record, dated 04/14/2025, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 03/18/25. Record review of Resident #1's admission MDS Assessment, dated 03/04/25, reflected she had a BIMS score of 15, indicating no cognitive impairment. Her active diagnoses included cerebrovascular…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-15 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — isolated
  Make sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
  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 effective pest control program to keep the facility free of pests for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pest control. The facility failed to prevent pests from entering the facility. On 05/28/25, Resident #1 was found in bed with ants (breed/type unknown) on his body, and he had been bitten multiple times on his torso, arms, and legs. This failure placed residents at risk of physical harm from ant or other pest bites. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's MDS dated [DATE] reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility 04/09/25. His diagnoses included stroke, hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body), anoxic brain damage (when the brain is deprived of oxygen, leading to damage brain cells) and bell's palsy (a condition that causes temporary weakness or paralysis of the muscles on one side of the face). Resident #1 had a BIMS of 0 indicating his cognition was severely…

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

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-15 · tag F0694 — isolated
  Provide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids 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 parenteral fluids were administered consistent with professional standards of practice and in accordance with physician orders for one (Residents #1) of three residents reviewed for parenenteral fluids. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received routine PICC line dressing changes per physician orders. This failure placed the residents at risk for infections. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included hypertension, diabetes, encounter for other orthopedic aftercare, and infection reaction due to sepsis (a serious condition in which the body responds improperly to infection) to joint prosthetic. The MDS further reflected Resident #1's cognition was intact, and he was on IV medications. Review of Resident #1's care plan created on 07/21/24 reflected Resident #1 used a PICC line (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 · 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

$14,676 in federal fines across 2 penalties. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.

• $607 — penalty dated 2025-07-25
• $14,069 — penalty dated 2025-04-15
• Medicare payment denial — starting 2025-05-15 for 27 days

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 OPCO SKILLED MANAGEMENT — 66 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 21 rows in the source record cover these 20 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

10 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 81% 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. This home reported $1.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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