Life Care Center Of Haltom

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

61.3% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 124 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 73.5% 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 68 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 0.42 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 72% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 14% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 127 beds and averages 100.7 residents a day — about 79% occupied, or roughly 26 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.56 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.80 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.88 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.08 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.75 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.90 to 0.55 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 60% is well above the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are 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.

25 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 15 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2026-03-05 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and time frames to meet a resident's medical and nursing needs to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 3 of 3 residents (Resident #15, Resident #27 and Resident #33) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. 1. The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for Resident #15 that addressed the cleaning and storage of BIPAP machine (a noninvasive ventilatory device that helps patients breathe by delivering two levels of air pressure: higher during inhalation and lower during exhalation to include cleaning or storage of the machine) and equipment.2. The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for Resident #27 that addressed the changing and labeling of her oxygen tubing and water bottle. 3. The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-03-05 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — pattern
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure a resident who needed respiratory care, was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for 3 of 4 residents (Residents #15, #27, and #33) reviewed for respiratory care.1. The nursing facility failed to clean, store, and document the use of a BIPAP (a noninvasive ventilatory device that helps patients breathe by delivering two levels of air pressure: higher during inhalation and lower during exhalation) for Resident #15 and Resident #33. 2. LVN-E failed to change and label Resident #27's nasal cannula (a tube with two prongs used to deliver supplemental oxygen to patients) and water bottle on 03/05/26. These failures could place residents at risk for respiratory infections. Resident #15Record review of Resident #15's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed he was a [AGE] year-old male that was admitted on [DATE]. His BIMS…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-05 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that an alleged violation involving abuse was reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation was made for 1 (Resident #1) of 10 residents reviewed for abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment. LVN B failed to immediately report an allegation of sexual abuse on 02/17/26 at 3:00 AM after Resident #2 wandered into the wrong room, and Resident #3 alleged that Resident #1 was molested by Resident #2. The Administrator was made aware of the allegation by Resident #3 on 02/17/26 at 11:00 AM and reported it to the state agency at that time. This failure could place residents at risk for continued abuse.Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Discharge MDS Assessment, dated 02/17/26, reflected the resident was an [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 02/17/26. The resident's BIMS score was not indicated. The MDS Assessment under Section GG-Functional Abilities, 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-15 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
  Ensure 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 the appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feedings for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #13) reviewed for enteral nutrition.The facility failed to include Resident #13's down time in the physician orders for enteral feeding. The facility failed to include Resident #13's down time from enteral feeding on her Medication Administration Record. These failures could affect residents receiving enteral nutrition/hydration and place them at risk of health complications and decline in nutrition.Findings included:Record review of Resident #13's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old female originally admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident BIMS score was 00 (which indicates severe thinking and cognitive function). Resident #13's cognitive skills for daily decision making indicated severely impaired. The assessment reflected 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-15 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
  Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services, including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals, to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 6 medication carts (Hall B cart) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure one bottle of zinc, with an expiration date of November 2025, had been removed from the Hall B medication cart. This failure could place residents at risk of receiving expired medications that were ineffective. Findings included: Observation on 01/14/26 at 12:39 PM of the Hall B MA cart with MA A revealed one bottle of zinc 50 mg (medication to help with zinc deficiency and used to help the body's immune system fight infections and heal wounds) with an expiration date of 11/2025. Interview on 01/14/26 at 12:51 PM with MA A confirmed the zinc expired in November 2025. MA A stated she checked her carts every 2 weeks for expired medications, but she would review the medications daily as well. She stated she just…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-15 · tag F0849 — isolated
  Arrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to collaborate with hospice representatives and coordinate the hospice care planning process for each resident receiving hospice services, to ensure quality of care for the resident, ensuring communication with the hospice medical director, the resident's attending physician, and others participating in the provision of care for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #13) reviewed for hospice services. The facility failed to obtain Resident #13's physician's order for hospice services. This deficient practice could place residents who receive hospice services at-risk of receiving inadequate end-of-life care due to a lack of documentation, coordination of care and communication of resident needs.Findings included: Record review of Resident #13's admission MDS Assessment, dated 10/30/25, reflected she was an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. She had a BIMS score of 14 indicating no cognitive impairment. Her active diagnoses…

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

  Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-08-07 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — pattern
  Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation for 3 of 5 residents (Residents #2 and #3, and #4) Record reviewed for abuse.1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 did not verbally abuse Resident #2 on 03/18/25 .2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 did not verbally abuse Resident #3 on 06/28/25. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4 had the right to be free from abuse when CNA A threatened to hit the resident back on 06/06/25. This failure could place residents at risk for abuse.Findings included:1. Record review of Resident #1's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included non-Alzheimer's dementia (various types of dementia that do not involve Alzheimer's disease, including dementia with Lewy bodies, vascular dementia, and frontotemporal dementia),…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-08-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, 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 2 of 3 residents (Residents #5 and #7) reviewed for infection control.1. CNA G failed to wear a PPE when she provided Resident #5, who was on enhanced barrier precautions, with incontinence care on 08/06/2025 with a physician order for PPE dated 07/16/2025. 2. CNA H failed to perform proper hand hygiene practices to include changing her gloves and washing/sanitizing her hands when she provided Resident #7 incontinence care on 08/07/2025.These failures placed residents at risk of cross contamination and the spread of infection.1.Record review of Resident #5's entry MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female, who admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. The…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-07 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility must ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown origin source and misappropriation of resident property are reported immediately but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made to the administrator of the facility and to other officials (including to the State Survey Agency) for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #2) Record reviewed for reporting. The facility failed to report to the Administrator when Resident #1 verbally threatened Resident #2 on 03/18/25. This failure places residents at risk for further abuse. Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included non-Alzheimer's dementia, anxiety disorder, and depression. Resident #1 had a BIMS of 15 which indicated his cognition was intact. The MDS further reflected the 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-08-07 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
  Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
  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 have evidence that all alleged violations in response to allegations of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment were thoroughly investigated for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #5) Record reviewed for abuse.The facility failed to thoroughly investigate and an incident when CNA A asked Resident #5 for $0.50 to buy a soda on 07/23/2025. This failure places the residents at risk for misappropriation and exploitation. Findings included:Record review of Resident #5's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included non-Alzheimer's dementia, anxiety disorder, and depression. The resident had a BIMS of 14 which indicated her cognition was intact. Record review of Resident #5's care plan dated 05/06/25 reflected the resident was noted to be making false accusations against staff, stating staff are not answering her call light or attending to her needs, states…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

$22,205 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $22,205 — penalty dated 2026-07-09

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 LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA — 194 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

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

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 25 rows in the source record cover these 15 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

This home reported $938K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. 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 2024. 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, FY2024). 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