Mallard Creek Therapy And Living Center
6649 North Riverside Dr, Fort Worth, TX 76137 · For profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (817) 847-1860 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
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 | Not rated |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | Not rated |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | Not rated |
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 | Not rated |
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.
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 | 29.2% | 15.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.5% | 3.0% | 5.4% | better |
| 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 | 11.5% | 0.8% | 2.0% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 2.4% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star 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 | 3.6% | 3.3% | 3.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 20.8% | 18.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 2.7% | 3.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 24.5% | 13.4% | 21.2% | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
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.
Staffing
CMS has not published payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours for this facility yet — this can happen for newer, hospital-based, or recently-certified homes. It can also mean the home simply did not file, which CMS does not distinguish in this data, so treat the gap as unexplained rather than benign. Staffing is one of the three parts of the CMS star rating; where it’s missing, weigh the independent health-inspection score most, and ask the facility directly about its nurse-to-resident ratios and weekend RN coverage.
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.
- Potential for harm · E2026-07-02 · 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 store, label drugs and biologicals used in the facility in accordance with currently accepted professional principles, and include the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions, and the expiration date when applicable, on 1 medication carts (hall 400 Nurses cart) and 1 medication room of 4 medication carts and 1 medication room reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure proper storage of acidophilus 1 billion (supplements used to support gut health and maintain a healthy balance of bacteria in the digestive tract) which required refrigeration per manufacturer's guidelines. The facility failed to ensure proper storage and disposal of Resident #100's Tylenol suppository 650mg when it was stored in the refrigerator in the medication room (Resident discharged date unknown) The facility failed to ensure proper storage and disposal of Resident #102s Tylenol suppository 650mg when it was stored in the refrigerator 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 · E2026-07-02 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the facility's only kitchen reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to ensure an opened bottle of barbecue sauce was properly refrigerated after use in accordance with manufacturer instructions. The facility failed to ensure food items stored in the freezer were properly labeled with the contents after being removed from the original packages and dated to reflect when the food items were opened. The facility failed to ensure food packages stored in the freezer were properly sealed and secured. The facility failed to ensure frozen food items were protected from contamination, as evidenced by multiple individual-serving ice cream cups that had leaked, resulting in chocolate ice cream residue covering other individual-serving ice cream containers within the box. The facility failed to ensure frozen food items stored in the freezer were properly stored and protected, as evidenced…
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 · E2026-07-02 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide 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 3 of 6 residents (Resident#18, Resident#50, Resident#55), reviewed for infection control. 1.The facility failed to ensure MA C sanitized the blood pressure cuffs between (Resident#18, Resident#50, Resident#55), to prevent the spread of infections. 2.The facility failed to ensure a hospice aide transported clean linen by methods that ensure cleanliness. These failures could place residents at risk for healthcare associated cross contamination and infections. Findings include:Resident #18's1. Record review of Resident #18's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 05/05/26, reflected a [AGE] year-old female. Resident #18 had a BIMS score of 04, which indicated she had severe cognitive impairment. The resident had 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 · D2026-07-02 · 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
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible for 1 (Day Room) out of 1 Day Room reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility failed to ensure that 1 of 1 mechanical lift in the Day Room was locked, secured, and stored in a secure designated area when not in use. This failure could place residents, visitors and staff at risk of falls and/or injuries.Findings included: Observation of the facility's Day Room (a common area for residents to gather) on 07/01/26 at 8:43AM revealed a mechanical lift stored toward the entrance of the room, with the breaks unlocked. One resident was observed attempting to go into the Day Room at that time. During an interview with the ADON on 07/01/26 at 8:43AM, she verified the breaks of the mechanical lift were unlocked. The ADON stated mechanical lifts should be locked and stored away from residents in their designated location, which she identified as the charging station which was in the corner of the Day Room. The ADON stated the risk of…
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 · D2026-07-02 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide 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 that a resident who needs respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning, is provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, the residents' goals and preferences for two (Resident #16 and Resident #47) of five residents reviewed for respiratory care. 1.) The facility failed to ensure that Resident #16's nebulizer mouthpiece was bagged in a plastic bag and stored in a drawer, which was consistent with professional standards. 2.) The facility failed to ensure that Resident #47's nebulizer mouthpiece was bagged in a plastic bag and stored in a drawer, which was consistent with professional standards. These failures had the potential to affect residents receiving respiratory therapy by increasing their risk of health-associated infections.Findings included: 1.) Record review of Resident #16's Face Sheet, dated 07/02/26, reflected she was an…
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 · D2026-07-02 · 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 establish a system of records of receipt and disposition of all controlled drugs in sufficient detail to enable an accurate reconciliation for 1 Resident (Resident# 52) of 10 Residents reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure proper disposal of Resident #52's Lorazepam Oral (prescribed for the short-term relief of anxiety, trouble sleeping, or acute stress) Tablet 0.5mg (controlled medication) by taping narcotic medication and storing it in the 400-hall medication cart. These failures could place residents at risk of drug diversion, medication error, and risk of pills contamination due to broken seals.Findings included:Resident#52 Review of Resident #52's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 06/18/2026, reflected an [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. He had a BIMS score of 4, indicating he had severe cognitive impairment. The resident had diagnoses which included non-Alzheimer's disease. Review of Resident #52'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.
- 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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| DIEHL, KELSEY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2026 |
| JAMAL, SYED | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2026 |
| THOMPSON, JOHNNY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 05/01/2026 |
| BURNAM, SOON | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 05/01/2026 |
| KEETCH, CHAD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 03/01/2011 |
| CAPROCK CANYON HEALTHCARE LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/27/2026 |
| ENSIGN SERVICES INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/13/2026 |
| RIVERSIDE DRIVE HEALTH HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2026 |
| STANDARD BEARER HEALTHCARE OP, LP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2026 |
| THE ENSIGN GROUP INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/01/2026 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 15 rows in the source record cover these 10 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.
5 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.
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 2026-09-01 — CMS provider number 745061. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-07-02, 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.