Fort Worth Transitional Care Center
850 12Th Avenue, Fort Worth, TX 76104 · Government - Hospital district · 136 certified beds · (817) 882-8289 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (46) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $51,036 in federal fines (most recent 2026-04-08)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (69%) 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 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 2 to 1 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 6.1% | 15.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.0% | 3.0% | 5.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.4% | 2.4% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.1% | 3.3% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 5.6% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 15.7% | 18.0% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.4% | 3.8% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 7.2% | 13.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 8.5% | 9.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 2.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 95.7% | 88.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 31.7% | 25.7% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 17.2% | 12.3% | 12.0% | worse |
‡ 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.
54.9% 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 112 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 68.3% 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 41 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 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 37% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 6% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 54.9%CMS range 42.8–65.8 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.4%CMS range 7.5–17.6 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no 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 discharge | 68.3% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 discharge | 63.4% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 63.4% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 setting | 95.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 discharge | 92.1% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS 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 stay | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 2.9% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.5%CMS range 5.0–11.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 0.88 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS 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
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 136 beds and averages 93.3 residents a day — about 69% occupied, or roughly 43 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 0.60 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.64 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 2.66 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.27 on weekdays — 19% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.64 to 0.51 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 69% is well above 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.
46 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 33 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Kcited before2026-04-08 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning, is provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #71, Resident #8) reviewed for respiratory care.1.The facility failed to provide tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning for Resident #71 when she experienced shortness of breath and was transferred to the hospital and had her trache replaced in the emergency room2.The facility failed ensure an Ambu bag (a handheld, self-inflating device that forces air or oxygen into the lungs during emergencies) an emergency equipment was available in Resident #8's room.3.The facility failed to monitor the Resident #8 oxygenation status during high-risk procedure when suctioning.4. The facility failed to ensure timely response to Resident #8 when he required suctioning.On 04/07/26 at 3:20 PM, an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified, and the Administrator 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.
- Actual harm · Hcited before2026-04-08 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — patternEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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 and interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure residents receiving enteral nutrition (g tube) received appropriate care, treatment and service to maintain nutritional status to prevent complications and ensure safe feeding practices consistent with professional standards of practice for 2 (Residents #71 and Resident #8) of 4 residents reviewed for enteral feeding. The facility failed to monitor for complications related to Resident #71 feeding tube and tube feeding when Resident #71 was transferred to the hospital and had part of the g-tube replaced. The facility failed to ensure LVN F allowed Resident's #8 medication to flow by gravity while administering through G-Tube on 04/07/2026 and not using force.This failure could put residents at risk of inaccurate delivery of prescribed nutrition and medication administration.Findings included: Record review of Resident #71's Comprehensive MDS assessment, dated 01/11/2026, reflected She was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2025-06-24 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 residents received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 9 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents. RN A and CNA B failed to monitor/supervise Resident #1 on 05/27/25 who suffered a fall and laid on the floor for 3 hours before being found. The resident sustained a broken leg as a result of the fall. The noncompliance was identified as past noncompliance that began on 05/27/25 and ended on 05/28/25. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place residents at risk of injury. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's undated admission Record reflected Resident #1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included liver failure, dementia, and repeated falls. Record review of Resident #1's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], revealed a BIMS score of 9 indicating she had moderate cognitive impairment. Her Functional Ability…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-04-08 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to label and store Drugs and biologicals under proper temperature controls in accordance with State and Federal laws on two residents (Resident#13,Resident# (300 and 200 hall nurses medication cart) of 4 medication carts reviewed for medication storage. 1.The facility failed to ensure Resident#13's opened vial of Lorazepam was not refrigerated and was stored in the medication cart.2. The facility failed to ensure opened Lantus SoloStar Subcutaneous Solution Pen-injector 100 UNIT/ML (a long-acting human insulin) was properly labeled with resident name before it was stored in the medication cart.3. The facility failed to ensure two bottles of nystatin were properly labeled with patients label after opening and before it was stored in the medication cart.4. The facility failed to ensure a tube of ammonium lactate 12% was properly labeled after opening and before it was stored in the medication cart. These failures could place residents at risk…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-08 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that included instructions and services needed to provide effective and person-centered care for the resident that met professional standards of care within 48 hours of the resident's admission for one (Resident #119) of five residents reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility failed to complete a baseline care plan for Resident #119 within 48 hours of her admission. This failure could place newly admitted residents at risk of not receiving effective and person-centered care and services.Findings included: Review of Resident #119's Face Sheet, dated 04/08/26, reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female, who admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses including chronic multifocal osteomyelitis of the left ankle and foot (a rare inflammatory bone condition characterized by multiple sites of bone infection), type 2 diabetes mellitus (a chronic condition characterized by insulin…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-08 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #14) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #14's comprehensive care plan identified bed rail use as an intervention for mobility assistance. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for not receiving proper care and services due to inaccurate care plans. Findings included: Record review of Resident #14's MDS assessment dated [DATE], reflected a [AGE] year-old female, originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with a BIMS score of 14 which indicated intact cognitive impairment and diagnoses that included: Cerebral infarction (a type of stroke caused by a blocked blood vessel…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-08 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure correct use of bed rails and to assess the resident for risk of entrapment from bed rails for 1 (Resident #7) of 4 residents whose records were reviewed for the use of side rails. The facility failed to complete a quarterly bed rail assessment and have a current physician's order for the continued use of Resident #7's siderails. This failure could place residents at risk of entrapment or injury.Findings included: Record review of Resident #7's face sheet, dated 04/06/25, revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Age-Related Physical Debility (geriatric syndrome characterized by a gradual decline in physiological reserve, muscle strength, and functional capacity), Functional Quadriplegia (a patient cannot move their limbs due to extreme physical frailty or advanced chronic illness), Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis following Cerebral Infarction (one-sided body impairments caused by brain or spinal cord…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-08 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide 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, administering and disposition of all controlled drugs for 2 (Resident #79, and Resident #3) of 10 residents reviewed for pharmacy services.1. The facility failed to ensure proper disposal of Resident#79's Tylenol 300/30mg (controlled medication) by taping the blister pack of a narcotic medication.2. The facility failed to ensure nursing staff reconstituted Resident#3's IV medication prior to administration.This failure could place residents at risk of drug diversion, medication errors, and risk of pills contamination due to broken seals.Findings Included1.Record review of Resident #79's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 01/20/26, reflected Resident #79 was a [AGE] year-old female, admitted [DATE] and readmitted [DATE].She had a BIMS score of 12, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The resident had diagnoses including chronic…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-03 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide 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 must provide each resident with the necessary care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable, physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being consistent with the resident's comprehensive assessment and care plan by ensuring a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living receives the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal hygiene for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for ADL care. The facility failed to provide Resident #1 assistance with timely incontinence care for at least 4 hours on 10/23/25, which resulted in Resident #1 being soaked with urine and soiled through her brief, draw sheet, and bed sheets. This failure could place the residents at risk for decreased feeling of self-worth, skin breakdown, and infection. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 10/23/25, reflected Resident #1 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-03 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 residents were provided an environment that was free from accident hazards for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's mattress overlay was properly secured to prevent her from falling out of bed. This failure could place residents at risk of falls and resulting injuries. Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], reflected the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included stroke affecting her left side, dysphasia (inability to swallow), aphasia (inability to speak), and breathing difficulty requiring the placement of a tracheostomy (breathing tube in her neck). Her BIMS score was not completed due to her medical conditions. Her Functional Ability assessment indicated she was totally dependent on staff for all her ADLs. Record review of Resident #1's care plan, dated 06/16/25, reflected she was a fall risk…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-24 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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 fed by enteral means received treatment to prevent complications of enteral feedings for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #2) reviewed for enteral feedings. CNA H paused the resident's feeding pump for perineal care and failed to re-start the pump after the care was completed, or ask a nurse to re-start it. This failure could place the resident at risk of not receiving the prescribed nutritional calories she required. Findings included: Record review of Resident #2's undated admission Record reflected Resident #2 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included stroke affecting her left side, inability to swallow requiring the placement of a gastric tube, and difficulty maintaining her airway requiring the placement of a tracheostomy. Record review of Resident #2's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], reflected a BIMS score not calculated based on her medical conditions. Her Functional Ability…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-11 · tag F0770 — failed to provide lab services — isolatedProvide 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to provide or obtain laboratory services to meet the needs of its residents and failed to be responsible for the quality and timeliness of the services for one (Resident #1) of five residents reviewed for laboratory services. The facility failed to complete Resident #1's lab order for a urinalysis with C&S (a diagnostic test that involves analyzing a urine sample to detect and identify potential infections and determine their susceptibility to antibiotics) as ordered by the physician. The failure could place residents at risk for delays in the provision of treatment for laboratory abnormalities and acute exacerbation of clinical conditions. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet dated 03/27/25 revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] from an acute stay at the hospital. Resident #1's diagnosis included a fracture of the left femur (upper leg bone), orthopedic…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-02-13 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment that describes the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 5 of 16 residents (Residents #26, #32, #37, #54, and #194) reviewed for care plan accuracy. 1. The facility failed to develop and implement care plans for Residents #26, #32, #37, and #54, which addressed the residents' physician orders to be weighed weekly. 2. The facility failed to develop and implement a care plan for Resident #194, which addressed his need for a mechanical lift to be used for transfers. The failure placed residents at risk for potential weight loss and nutrtional decline. Findings…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 33 citations
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-13 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — patternProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
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 maintained acceptable parameters of nutritional status for one (Resident #28) of ten residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility failed to ensure Resident #28 maintained an acceptable weight causing her to trigger a -7.75 percent weight loss. The facility failed to provide weekly weight checks for Resident #28 beginning 12/19/24 with missing dates of 12/19/24, 12/26/24, 01/02/25, 01/09/25, 01/17/25, 01/23/25. These failures placed residents at-risk for weight loss and inadequate nutrition. Findings included: Review of Resident #28's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 12/11/24 revealed the resident was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #28 had a BIMS score of 6 which indicated severe cognition impairment. The resident's diagnoses included Anemia (not having enough red blood cells to carry oxygen), High Blood Pressure (pressure inside arteries are higher than it…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-02-13 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide 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 of 3 residents (Residents #44 and #54) reviewed for oxygen. 1. The facility failed to have accurate physician orders for Resident #44's oxygen use. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #54, who was ventilator dependent, was repositioned every two hours to assist the resident in expectorating secretions. This failure could place residents who received oxygen therapy at risk for inadequate or inappropriate amounts of oxygen delivery and possible infection. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #44's admission Record dated 01/08/25 reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Review of Resident #44's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], revealed the resident was not able to completed the BIMS due to cognitive impairment. The resident's 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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-13 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — patternEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure any drug regimen irregularities reported by the Pharmacist Consultant were acted upon, for one resident (Resident #56) of five residents whose medications were reviewed. The facility's Pharmacy Consultant recommended the physician should consider a gradual dose reduction for Resident #56's Duloxetine (used to treat depression) and Zolpidem (used to treat insomnia) on 08/19/24. The facility failed to ensure this was communicated to the resident's primary care physician regarding the recommendation. This failure could place residents receiving medications at risk for adverse consequences and could cause a decline in their physical, mental, and psychosocial condition. Findings included: Review of Resident #56's admission Record, dated 01/30/25, reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #56's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 12/03/24, reflected she had a BIMS score of 13…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-13 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — patternImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents who use psychotropic drugs receive gradual dose reductions unless clinically contraindicated, in an effort to discontinue these drugs for 1 (Resident #56) of 3 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications/ gradual dose reduction. The facility failed to ensure a gradual dose reduction (GDR) was attempted or to document contraindication for a gradual dose reduction for Resident #56's ordered Duloxetine (an antidepressant used to treat depression) and Zolpidem (a sedative-hypnotic used to treat insomnia). This failure could place residents at risk for possible psychotropic medication side effects, adverse consequences, decreased quality of life and dependence on unnecessary medications. Findings included: Review of Resident #56's admission Record, dated 01/30/25, reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #56's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 12/03/24, reflected…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-13 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — patternEnsure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the menus were followed for 1 (the lunch meal on 01/28/25) of 2 meals reviewed for menus. The facility did not serve the posted lunch menu of roast beef, red cabbage, dill potatoes, or ice cream on 01/28/25. This failure could affect all residents in the facility, who eat from the kitchen, by placing them at risk of not knowing what was going to be served for that meal. Findings included: Observation on 01/28/25 at 12:00 PM of the monthly menu posted near the dining room reflected for Tuesday, January 28th the following: Roast Beef, Dill Potatoes, Red Cabbage, Wheat Bread, Margarine, Ice Cream, Coffee or Tea, Garnish Parsley Sprig. Observation on 01/28/25 at 12:17 PM revealed an unknown dietary aide brought the daily menu posting to the 3rd floor dining room area which listed the following: beef tips, season potatoes, cabbage, roll with butter, and pears. Interview on 01/28/25 at 12:22 PM with Resident #22 revealed the menu was not usually posted or followed. Resident #22 said she never knew what was going to be…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-13 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — patternEnsure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
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 residents received meals at regular times comparable to normal mealtimes in the community or in accordance with resident needs and preferences for one meal (the lunch meal on 01/28/25) of three meals reviewed for frequency of meals. The facility failed to ensure residents received meals at regularly scheduled times for lunch on 01/28/25. This failure could place residents who eat from the facility's kitchen at risk of increased hunger. Findings included: Review of a piece of paper provided by the facility, titled [Facility Name] Meal Service Time are as Follows .Lunch: 12:00 pm-1:00 pm . Interview on 01/28/25 at 12:22 PM with Resident #22 revealed lunch was served late often and they did not have a choice because they could not get food anywhere else. Resident #22 said she was getting very hungry having to wait for them to start serving lunch. Observation on 01/28/25 at 12:40 PM of the 3rd floor's satellite kitchen's steamtables revealed the dietary staff began taking the temperatures of the food. One…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-02-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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 review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the 3rd floor's satellite kitchen. 1.The facility failed to ensure drinks leaving the 3rd floor's satellite kitchen were covered before being put on the hall cart to be delivered to residents eating in their rooms. 2.The facility failed to ensure the five steamtable compartments on the 3rd floor's satellite kitchen were clean and free of debris before food was placed in them. These failures could affect residents who received their meals from the facility's only kitchen, by placing them at risk for food-borne illness, and food contamination. Findings included: 1.Observation on 01/28/25 at 1:45 PM of the lunch tray cart on the 3rd floor revealed there were 21 resident's trays on the cart. Each tray on the cart had a drink on it filled with liquid but was not covered with anything. Interview on 01/28/25 at 1:45 PM with CNA I and CNA H revealed they never knew that the drinks on the trays were…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-13 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — patternMake 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 to keep the facility free of pests for 1 of 2 dining rooms (Third Floor dining room) reviewed for pest control. The facility failed to ensure the Third Floor dining room was free of roaches. This failure could affect residents by placing them at risk for the potential spread of infection, cross-contamination, food-borne illness, and decreased quality of life. Findings included: Observation and interview on 01/28/25 at 12:54 PM revealed there were two roaches along the baseboards in the dining room on the Third Floor while residents were waiting to be served lunch. According to Resident #22, there were roaches all over the facility. Resident #22 stated there were roaches in her room as well. Resident #22 said that roaches have been present for a long time and she did not feel whatever was being done was effective. Resident #22 stated there has been several times she has found roaches in her personal items and tried to kill them. In a confidential interview on 01/29/25…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-13 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure each reaident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #194) reviewed for supervision. CNA A failed to safely transfer Resident #194 on 01/15/25, which resulted in the resident having to be lowered to the floor. The failure placed residents at risk of injury. Findings included: Record review of Resident #194's Face Sheet dated 01/31/25 reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #194's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] reflected Resident #194 was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15. Functional limitation in range in motion indicated there was no impairment for upper and lower extremities and a mobility device of a wheelchair. Resident #194 was dependent on 2 or more staff for chair/bed-to-chair transfers, sit to lying, lying to sitting on side of the bed, toilet transfer, and tub/shower…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-13 · tag F0700 — isolatedTry different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to attempt to use alternatives prior to installing a side or bed rail, obtain informed consent prior to installation, ensure correct installation, use and maintenance of bedrails for 1 (Resident #22) of 3 residents reviewed for bedrails. The facility failed to obtain a bed rail assessment and physician's order prior to the installment of Resident #22's bedrails. This failure could place residents at risk of entrapment or injury. Findings included: Review of Resident #22's admission Record, dated 01/31/25, reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Review of Resident #22's admission MDS Assessment, dated 01/08/25, reflected he had a BIMS score of 03, indicating severe cognitive impairment. His active diagnoses included non-Alzheimer's disease, malignant neoplasm of prostate, and diabetes mellitus. His MDS did not address that he was receiving hospice services or utilized bed rails. Review of Resident #22'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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-13 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that are complete and accurately documented for 1 of 5 residents (Residents #194) reviewed for clinical records. The facility failed to ensure LVN B documented on Resident #194's clinical record that he had a fall. This failure could affect residents that required assistance with transferring with the use of a mechanical lift device by placing them at risk of having inaccurate or incomplete clinical records. Findings included: Record review of Resident #194's Face Sheet reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #194's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #194 was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15. Functional limitation in range in motion indicated there was no impairment for upper and lower extremities and a mobility device of a wheelchair. Resident #194 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-13 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
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 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 4 residents (Resident #32) observed for infection control. RN M failed to wear a gown and gloves while providing care for a resident on enhanced barrier precautions (EBP). This failure could lead to the resident being exposed to infections from other residents. Findings included: Observation on 01/29/25 at 7:24 AM of Resident #32's room revealed posting on the outside notifying staff and visitors the resident was on EBP, and it was required to wear a gown and gloves with all direct care of the resident. Observation on 01/29/25 at 7:24 AM revealed RN M administered seven medications via Resident #32's gastric tube, and one medication via subcutaneous injection while wearing gloves but no personal protective equipment (PPE) which included gown and gloves. Interview on 01/29/25 at 7:35 AM with RN…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-12-13 · tag F0729 — patternVerify that a nurse aide has been trained; and if they haven't worked as a nurse aide for 2 years, receive retraining.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to conduct pre-employment nurse aide registry check to determine if the individual met competency evaluation requirements for 1 of 3 nurse aides (CNA A) whose personnel files were reviewed for registry verification. The facility failed to conduct a pre-employment nurse aide registry (NAR) check on CNA A. This failure could place residents at risk of being exposed to staff with histories of misconducts that were unemployable, increasing the risk for abuse or neglect. Finding included: Record review of CNA A's employee file reflected a hire date of 11/18/2024. A Texas Criminal History Registry check was completed on 12/09/24 and EMR and NAR checks were completed on 12/13/24. Record review of CNA A's time sheet dated 11/16/24-11/30/24, reflected the aide's first effective work day was on 11/18/24, and she worked a total of 60 hours during this time period. Record review of the facility's document titled Daily Nursing Assignment, dated 11/18/24, reflected CNA A was assigned to work Hall 200 from 3:00 PM-10:00 PM. In an interview…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-30 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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 fed by enteral means receives the appropriate treatment and services to restore, if possible, oral eating skills and to prevent complications of enteral feeding including but not limited to aspiration pneumonia, diarrhea, vomiting, dehydration, metabolic abnormalities, and nasal-pharyngeal ulcers for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for enteral nutrition. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #3's head was elevated while his tube feeding was infusing. 2. The facility failed to date and time when Resident #3's bottle of liquid nutrition was hung. These failures could place residents at risk of aspiration (inhaling stomach contents into the lungs) and receiving nutrition fluid that is expired. Findings included: Record review of Resident #3's undated admission Record reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included brain tumor, paralysis,…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-30 · tag F0694 — isolatedProvide 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 for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for intravenous medications. 1. The facility failed to ensure the dressing on Resident #1's PICC line (used to deliver medications and other treatments directly to the large central veins near heart) was changed timely. Resident #1 went without a dressing change for 10 days. 2. The facility failed to have orders for PICC line dressing changes and flushes. The failures could affect residents by placing them at risk for infections and cross-contamination. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's entry MDS assessment, dated 10/22/24, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident had diagnoses which included: other acute osteomyelitis, right tibia, and fibula, (a bone infection of the two long bones located in the lower leg that develops quickly, usually…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-10-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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 8 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for infection control. CNA D failed to wear the appropriate PPE while providing care to Resident #4 who was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions. This failure could place residents at risk of being infected by staff in contact with other residents with infections. Findings included: Record review of Resident #4's undated admission Record reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included cerebral palsy, seizures, cognitive communication deficit, and difficulty swallowing. Record review of Resident #4's admission MDS, dated [DATE], reflected a BIMS score not calculated due to the resident's medical conditions. His…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-08-16 · tag F0624 — isolatedPrepare residents for a safe transfer or discharge from the nursing home.
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 provide and document sufficient preparation and orientation to residents to ensure a safe and orderly discharge from the facility for one resident (Resident #1) of six residents reviewed for discharge planning. SW A and MDS Nurse B failed to ensure Resident #1 filed her NOMNC appeal by 08/10/24 to continue to stay at the facility. SW A and MDS Nurse B failed to ensure Resident #1 was given the second option to appeal to her Medicare Health plan, before she discharged [DATE]. SW A failed to follow-up with the DME Provider on 08/14/24 to give them additional documents needed to process the delivery of Resident #1's wheelchair. SW A failed to ensure Resident #1's correct address was given to the Home Health Care provider to ensure they could provide services to the town she lived in. These failures could place residents at risk of being discharged home too soon and not having the appropriate healthcare services to meet their needs which could result in…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-26 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide 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 2 of 3 residents (Residents #1 and #2) reviewed for urine incontinence/catheters. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 and Resident #2's catheter urine collection bags were kept off the floor and failed to ensure the collection bags had privacy covers. This failure could place residents with catheters at risk for a loss of dignity, decreased self-worth and decreased self-esteem. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #1's undated admission Record reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male, admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Review of Resident #1's admission MDS assessment, dated 04/22/24, reflected the resident had moderate cognitive impairment with a BIMS score of 11. The resident had an indwelling catheter and required…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-04-30 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure 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 to prevent elopement for one (Resident #1) of five residents reviewed for elopements. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1, who had dementia and a history of wandering, had on a WanderGuard device as care planned to prevent elopement. This failure could place residents at risk of elopement or injury. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 04/25/23, revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included dementia (the loss of cognitive functioning that interferes with daily life and activities), muscle weakness, lack of coordination, and unsteadiness on her feet. Record review of Resident #1's admission MDS assessment, dated 02/25/24, revealed Resident #1's BIMS score was 8 indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The assessment reflected Resident #1 had no wandering behavior that had…
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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-04-30 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that were complete and accurately documented for 1 (Resident #3) of 5 residents reviewed for clinical records. The facility failed to ensure staff accurately documented on Resident #3's April 2024 Skilled Administration Record that she was being monitored for her behaviors. This failure could affect residents and place them at risk of inaccurate or incomplete clinical records. Findings included: Review of Resident #3's admission record, dated 04/25/24, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included dementia (the loss of cognitive functioning that interferes with daily life and activities). Review of Resident #3's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 02/20/24, revealed she had a BIMS score of 05 indicating severe cognitive impairment. Further review revealed Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-30 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably 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 one (Resident #5) of five residents reviewed for call lights. The facility failed to ensure Resident #5's call light was accessible. 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: Review of Resident #5's admission Record, dated 04/25/24, revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. His diagnoses included unspecified intellectual disabilities (a disorder with onset during the developmental period that includes both intellectual and adaptive functioning deficits), cognitive communication deficit (problems with communication that have an underlying cause in a cognitive deficit rather…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-04-30 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment were reported immediately to the Administrator for two (Residents #3 and #4) of four residents reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to ensure CNA Z immediately reported an allegation of abuse, on 02/03/24, when she observed Residents #3 and #4 were seen touching each other inappropriately, to the Administrator. This failure could place residents at risk of emotional, physical, and mental abuse. Findings included: Review of Resident #3's admission record, dated 04/25/24, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included dementia (a term for a range of conditions that affect the brain's ability to think, remember, and function normally). Review of Resident #3's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 02/20/24, reflected she had a BIMS score of 05 indicating severe 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-12-14 · tag F0655 — patternCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission for 3 of 7 residents (Residents #12, #31, and #132) reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility failed to ensure Residents #12, #31, and #132 had a baseline care plan, or conversely a comprehensive care plan, within 48 hours of admission. These failures could place the residents at risk of having their needs and preferences met. Findings included: Review of Resident # 12's undated admission Record revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included sick sinus syndrome (irregular heart beats and arrhythmia) requiring pacemaker placement, respiratory failure, and kidney failure. Review of Resident #12's admission MDS, dated [DATE], revealed a BIMS score of 5, indicating severe cognitive impairment. His Functional Status indicated he required assistance with all of his ADLs. Review of Resident #12's baseline care plan revealed it 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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-12-14 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
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 the facility provided food that was palatable, for one of one observed meal reviewed for dietary services. The facility failed to serve food that had a palatable texture during the lunch meal on 12/13/23. This failure could affect residents by placing them at risk of weight loss, altered nutritional status, and a diminished quality of life. Findings included: Review of the facility's menu on 12/13/23 revealed the planned lunch consisted of crispy pork loin, orzo, buttered beets, wheat roll, margarine, baked pineapple, coffee or tea, and garnish carrot curl. Observation on 12/13/23 at 12:39 PM of the mechanical soft texture test tray with three surveyors, the Dietitian and Dietary Manager revealed the food was warm; however, the orzo (pasta) and pork loin were both bland and flavorless. A confidential interview with seven alert and oriented residents revealed the pasta and pork were both tasteless and most meals were being served that way. They stated the taste of the food was not getting any better even…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-14 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor 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 ensure residents have a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment for 2 of 5 residents (Resident #37 and #49) reviewed for physical environment as evidenced by: The facility failed to ensure Resident #37 and #49's g-tube poles and floor were clean. These failures could place the three residents observed on g-tube feeding, at risk for the spread of infection and disease, a diminished quality of life and a diminished clean, homelike environment. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #37's face sheet, dated 12/14/23, revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old-female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included encounter for attention to gastrostomy (a surgical opening through the skin of the abdomen to the stomach), epilepsy (seizure disorder) and dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). Review of Resident #37's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 09/22/23, revealed her BIMS score was 0,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-14 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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 was fed by enteral means received appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications for two (Resident #65 and #64) of four reviewed for feeding tubes. 1. The facility failed to follow physician's orders of providing Resident #65 with his 20 hours of feeding intake. 2. LVN F failed to provide Resident #64 her 10:00 AM bolus feeding as ordered by the physician. This failure could place residents at risk for a decline in health or adverse effects due to inappropriate management of G-tube care. Finding included: 1. Review of Resident #65's MDS dated [DATE] revealed he was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included anemia, quadriplegia, COPD, moderate protein calorie malnutrition, and encounter for attention gastrostomy (g-tube) a tube inserted through the belly that brings nutrition directly to the stomach. Resident #65 had a BIM of 3 (cognition 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-14 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide 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 administering of drugs and biologicals to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #27) reviewed for insulin administration. LVN A failed to administer Resident #27's insulin according to physician's orders. This failure could place residents at risk for diminished quality of care. Findings included: Review of Resident #27's MDS dated [DATE] revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included heart failure, hypertension (high blood pressure), end stage renal disease, and diabetes mellitus. Resident #27 had a BIMS of 14 (cognition intact). Review of Resident #27's care plan initiated 05/22/23 revealed he had diabetes mellitus and interventions included to give diabetes medications as ordered by the doctor. Review of Resident #27's December 2023 Order Summary Report reflected an order for…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-14 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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 residents were free of any significant medication errors for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #227) reviewed for medication errors. ADON G failed to communicate an order change, which resulted in Resident #227 missing two days of antibiotic therapy. This failure could place residents at risk of their infections worsening, and extending their length of stay in the facility. Findings included: Review of Resident #227's undated admission Record revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included urinary tract infection, post kidney transplant status, and diabetes. Review of Resident #227's admission MDS, dated [DATE], revealed a BIMS score of 15, indicating he was cognitively intact. His Functional Status indicated he required minimal assistance with his ADLs. Review of Resident #227's care plan, dated 11/06/23, revealed he had a self-care deficit related to recent hospitalization, and had a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-14 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for one of one kitchen reviewed for food and nutrition services. Cook E failed to wear a hair restraint while in the facility's kitchen on 12/12/23. These failures could place residents at risk for food contamination and foodborne illness. Findings included: Observation on 12/12/23 at 8:40 AM revealed [NAME] E not wearing a hairnet while putting away food items. Observed [NAME] E's hair to be down and her hair length was approximately over her shoulder. Interview on 12/12/23 at 8:53 AM with [NAME] E revealed she had been employed for seven months. She stated the first thing the staff were required to do upon entering the kitchen was to put on a hairnet restraint. She stated she got busy and forgot to put on a hairnet, which was her reason she was not wearing a hairnet, while putting away food items. She stated the potential risk of not wearing a hairnet could be hair falling inside the food. Interview…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-30 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that were complete and accurately documented for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for clinical records. The facility staff failed to document Resident #1's vitals and an assessment in the resident's EHR after the family had concerns for a change in condition. This failure could place all residents at risk for an impact to their treatment and health. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 11/30/23, revealed she was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: disorder of calcium metabolism (abnormal calcium levels), type 2 diabetes, end stage renal disease (kidney disease), and congestive heart failure (heart disease). Record review of Resident #1's admission MDS assessment, dated 11/28/23, revealed she had a BIMs score of 15 which indicated her cognition was intact. Further…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-18 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard 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, maintain medical records on each resident that were complete, accurately documented and readily accessible for one of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for clinical records. The facility failed to ensure funeral plans were documented in the EHR and accessible to staff at the time of Resident #1's death. This failure could place residents at risk for not having their decision for final rest and disposition honored. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated [DATE], revealed Resident #1 was an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 was a DNR and suffered a cardiac arrest on [DATE] and expired on [DATE] at 7:45 PM. Record review of the Mortician Receipt/Death Report form, dated [DATE], revealed Resident #1 was released into the care of a funeral home selected by the facility. In an interview on [DATE] at 2:15 PM, ADON B…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-21 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable or required assistance to carry out activities of daily living (ADLs) received the necessary services to maintain good personal hygiene, for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #1) reviewed for ADLs. The facility failed to provide a shower for Resident #1 on a Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday schedule. This failure could place residents who required assistance with showering and maintaining good personal hygiene at risk for not receiving care and services to meet their needs and avoid ADL decline. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 08/18/23, revealed a [AGE] year-old female, with an admission date of 08/15/23, and a diagnoses of Displaced Fracture of Base of Neck of Right Femur, Muscle wasting and atrophy, Abnormalities of Gait (manner of walking) and Mobility, Unspecified Lack of Coordination, Cognitive Communication Deficit, Need for Assistance with Personal Care, Depression (disorder that…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-21 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that drugs and biologicals used in the facility were secured properly for 1 of 1 nurse wound care/ treatment cart (Hall 300 nurse wound care/ treatment cart) reviewed for drug storage, as evidenced by; Nurse Wound cart/Treatment cart was left unlocked and unsupervised This deficient practice could place residents at risk for harm and place the facility at risk for possible drug diversion or physical harm. Findings included: Observation on 08/21/23 at 11:14 AM revealed an unlocked wound care/treatment cart was left unsupervised and parked in the 300 hall. There was no facility staff near the cart. There was no nurse in charge of the cart at the time of observation (LVN D) walked to the cart after seeing investigators documenting contents of Drawer #1 and Drawer #5. She left to find the keys for the cart. In an interview on 08/21/23 at 11:19 AM, LVN D returned with the cart key and locked the cart. She said she was starting her shift and stated the wound care carts are kept locked if unattended. She did…
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.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
$51,036 in federal fines across 3 penalties.
- $36,040 — penalty dated 2026-04-08
- $8,964 — penalty dated 2025-06-24
- $6,032 — penalty dated 2024-08-16
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to WELLSENTIAL HEALTH — 67 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 2.7 | -1.7 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.9 | -1.9 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
The other 66 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.7★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 66; 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 / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DECATUR HOSPITAL AUTHORITY | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | 100% | since 03/04/2026 |
| BAIRD, DANIEL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 04/13/2021 |
| CARVAJAL, ANTONIO | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 05/16/2024 |
| CLAPP, BARBARA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 06/01/2021 |
| CORTESE, DAREN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 08/10/2021 |
| GIBSON, PATRICIA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 08/01/2021 |
| GONZALES, VERONICA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 05/16/2024 |
| KAUFMAN, NICOLE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 08/10/2021 |
| MANDELBAUM, ELLIOT | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| WAGGONER, DEBRA SUE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 12/10/2007 |
| BAKKER, JEFF | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 04/02/2017 |
| COCANOUGHER, CHARLES | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 10/24/2010 |
| COOK, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/13/2014 |
| DUNCUM, JOHN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 03/08/2010 |
| FORBIS, CHRISTOPHER | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 10/03/1994 |
| SANDFORD, WILLIAM | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 12/10/2007 |
| SCROGGINS, BRIAN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 10/03/2014 |
| SICKING, JEFFREY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 12/15/2015 |
| WILLIAMS, CAREY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 12/15/2015 |
| CROW, BRADLEY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/14/2025 |
| SANCHEZ, CHRISTIAN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| 850 12TH AVENUE, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| CSV RHEA MANAGEMENT HOLDCO, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| DWD TX HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| JACK AND NANCY DWYER WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT CENTER INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| REG BRIDGE OPCO LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| REG HG OPCO LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| REG OPERATOR HOLDCO LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| REGENCY IHS CLINICAL CONSULTING, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| REGENCY IHS OF FORT WORTH LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| REGENCY IHS REHAB LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| REGENCY INTEGRATED HEALTH SERVICES LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| REGENCY TEXAS HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| DEKOWSKI, DONOVAN | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2018 |
| GESSNER, BRUCE | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| SMITH, MICHAEL | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/10/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 39 rows in the source record cover these 36 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
13 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.
A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in TX
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.
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 676255. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-08, 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.