Franklin Nursing Home
700 Hearne St, Franklin, TX 77856 · Government - Hospital district · 90 certified beds · (979) 828-5152 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high number of inspection citations overall (19) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
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 | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
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 5 to 3 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 | 19.3% | 15.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.0% | 3.0% | 5.4% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| 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 | 1.1% | 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 | 1.0% | 3.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 7.1% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 10.8% | 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 | 1.2% | 3.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 10.7% | 13.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 0.0% | 9.6% | 17.1% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 88.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 19.4% | 25.7% | 22.6% | better |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 16.0% | 12.3% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.34 | 2.17 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.91 | 2.06 | 1.80 | better |
* 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.
§ 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.
Met the expected recovery: 50.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 22 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 0.54 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 85% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 22% 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 11.2%CMS range 7.0–16.8 | 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 | 50.0% | 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 | 40.9% | 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 | 45.5% | 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 | 97.0% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 | 3.0% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.70 | 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 90 beds and averages 53.0 residents a day — about 59% occupied, or roughly 37 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.13 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.36 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.81 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 2.59 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.35 on weekdays — 23% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.41 to 0.23 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
1 administrator has left in the past year.
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 unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.
19 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 9 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · E2025-12-03 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — patternMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
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 be adequately equipped to allow residents to call for staff assistance through a communication system which relays the call directly to a staff member or a centralized staff work area from each resident's bedside for 4 of 12 residents (Residents # 1, # 2, #3 and # 4) reviewed for call lights.The facility failed to ensure Resident # 1 had an operating call light system. The facility failed to ensure the call light system was accessible to Residents # 2, # 3 and # 4. These failures could place residents at risk of not being able to call for staff assistance to meet care needs or at risk of injury, pain, hospitalization, and a diminished quality of life.Findings include:Record review of a face sheet dated 12/3/2025 indicated that Resident #1 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including: dementia (confusion due to aging with inability to remember), muscle weakness, difficulty ambulating, and muscle…
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 · D2025-09-11 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure that residents received housekeeping services to maintain a sanitary and comfortable interior for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #22). The facility failed to ensure that housekeeping attendants cleaned and sanitized the interior of the bathroom cabinet in Resident #22's bathroom. This failure could result in potential cross contamination and illness for residents. Findings included: Record review of Resident #22's undated face sheet, printed on 9/09/2025, reflected a [AGE] year old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a lung disease limiting air flow from the lungs), cognitive communication deficit (problem with communication caused by cognition rather than a language or speech deficit), and paranoid schizophrenia (condition in which the mind creates a highly detailed alternate reality that feels completely real, causing suspicion and fear). Record review of 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 · D2025-09-11 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that the comprehensive care plan was reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment for 2 (Resident #9 and Resident #37) of 6 residents reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to update Resident #9's and Resident #37's care plan to reflect current activity needs for in room activities. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving necessary services or having important needs identified and met. Findings included:Record review of Resident #9's face sheet, dated 09/10/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old male, admitted [DATE] and readmitted [DATE]. Resident #9 had diagnoses which included major depressive disorder, unspecified (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest), anxiety disorder (a mental health disorder that produces fear, worry, and a constant feeling of being overwhelmed), other lack of coordination (the body's movements are not smooth, controlled, or…
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 before2025-09-11 · 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 observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for two of eight residents (Resident# 9, and Resident #37) reviewed for ADL care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #9's and Resident # 37's nails were cleaned, and did not have any rough edges. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving services or care, diminished quality of life, and decreased self-esteem.Findings included: Record review of Resident #9's face sheet, dated 09/10/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old male, admitted [DATE] and readmitted [DATE]. Resident #9 had diagnoses which included major depressive disorder, unspecified (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest), anxiety disorder (a mental health disorder that produces fear, worry, and a constant feeling of being overwhelmed), other lack 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 · D2025-09-11 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolatedProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
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, based on the comprehensive assessment and care plan and the preferences of each resident, an ongoing program to support residents in their choice of activities, both facility sponsored group and individual activities, and independent activities, designed to meet the interests of and support the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, encouraging both independence and interaction in the community for two of eight residents (Resident # 9, and Resident #37) reviewed for activities. The facility failed to provide Resident #9, and Resident #37 in room activities on the dates of 8/11/2025 thru 8/31/2025. This failure could place residents at risk for boredom, depression, and a diminished quality of life. Findings included:Record review of Resident # 9's face sheet, dated 09/10/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old male, admitted [DATE] and readmitted [DATE]. Resident #9 had diagnoses which included major depressive…
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 · D2025-09-11 · 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 reviews 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 1 of 2 (Resident #1) reviewed for respiratory care.Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's undated Face Sheet printed on [DATE] revealed a [AGE] year old, male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Down Syndrome (genetic disorder), Seizures, and Cognitive Communication Deficit (problem with communication caused by cognition rather than a language or speech deficit). Record review of Resident #1's Annual MDS, dated [DATE], reflected Resident #1 was sometimes able to make himself understood and sometimes able to understand others. BIMS score for Resident #1 reflected 00 (severe cognitive impairment). Record review of Resident #1's Physician's orders…
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 before2025-03-25 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure, in accordance with State and Federal laws, the facility stored all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments under proper temperature controls and permitted only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for one of one nurses' treatment cart reviewed for medication storage. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's prescription shampoo was stored in the locked treatment nurse cart and instead was stored in the open shower room. This failure could place residents at risk of misuse of medications leading to harm . Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated, 03/25/2025, reflected an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included need assistance for personal care (assistance with basic daily activities like bathing, dressing, eating, toileting, and grooming), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease ( a group of lung diseases that cause ongoing…
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 before2024-08-15 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide 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, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents unable to conduct activities of daily living (ADLs) received the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for three of eight (Resident #17, Resident #31, and Resident #46) residents reviewed for ADL care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #17, Resident # 31, and Resident #46 nails were cleaned and smooth around the edges. These failures placed residents at risk of a decline in their hygiene, at risk of skin breakdown, loss of dignity and decline in quality of life. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident # 17's Face Sheet dated, 08/14/2024, reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of type 2 diabetes mellitus with other circulatory complications (high levels of blood glucose can damage the blood vessels and nerves that control the heart), diabetes mellitus due to underlying condition with diabetic neuropathy, unspecified (a metabolic…
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 · D2024-08-15 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
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 treat residents with respect and dignity and care for them in a manner and in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of their quality of life for one (Resident # 53) of eight residents reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to treat Resident #53 with respect and dignity when the staff was standing while feeding Resident #53 on 08/13/2024. This failure could place residents at risk for decreased quality of life, increased anxiety, and unmet needs. Finding included: Record review of Resident # 53's Face Sheet, dated 08/14/2024 reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of down syndrome ( a genetic condition that can affect how their brain and body develop), anxiety disorder (a condition in which a person has excessive worry and feelings of fear. Symptoms may include irritability, dizziness, fast heartbeat and/or restlessness), cognitive communication deficit (mental…
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 before2024-08-15 · 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 all drugs and biologicals, were in locked compartments and inaccessible to unauthorized staff, visitors , and residents for 3 of 3 medication carts reviewed for medication storage. The facility failed to prevent Medication Cart #1 and Medication Cart #2 being unattended and unlocked near the nurse's desk and one medication cart unlocked and unattended approximately 15 feet away from the right side of nurse's desk on 08/15/2024 between 1:30 AM to 1:43 AM . This failure could allow residents unsupervised access to prescription and over-the-counter medications. Findings included,-: Observation on 08/15/2024 at 1:30 AM LVN H was standing at the entrance door to the facility when Surveyor I was walking toward the door to enter the facility. LVN H opened the door for Surveyor I and when entered the facility. LVN H was walking very fast toward Medication cart #1 on the right side of the nurse's desk and locked the medication cart. She asked CNA J to lock Medication Cart #2 on the left side of the nurse's desk.…
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 9 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-15 · 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 food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for one of one kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation. The facility failed to ensure the Maintenance Supervisor K wore a hair net and beard net and the Administrator wore a hair net while standing over large bowl of approximately 15 uncooked chicken breasts in the sink on 08/13/2024. These failures could place residents who were served from the kitchen at risk for health complications, foodborne illness, and decreased quality of life. Findings included: Observation on 08/13/2024 at 9:15 AM the Administrator and the Maintenance Supervisor K walked into the kitchen without donning (the act of putting on gloves or a hair net) hair net and beard net. The Maintenance Supervisor was checking the temperature of the water in the sink. A large bowl of approximately 15 uncooked chicken breasts being defrosted was in the sink. The Maintenance Supervisor K and the Administrator was standing over the sink without wearing hair…
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 before2024-08-15 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an Infection Control Program designed to ensure hand hygiene procedures were followed by staff in the direct care of one ( Resident #1) of four residents reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure CNA F sanitized or washed her hands prior to touching contaminated surfaces (floor and chair) prior to touching Resident #1's food and prior to feeding Resident #1 on 08/13/2024. These failures could place residents at risk of cross contamination which could result in physical illness. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 08/14/2024, reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of transient cerebral ischemic attack, unspecified ( a medical emergency that occurs when the blood flow to the brain is temporarily disrupted, causing a lack of oxygen), unspecified dementia, unspecified severity, without behavioral disturbance, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance, and…
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 · E2023-12-19 · tag F0644 — patternCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 interview, observation, and record review the facility failed to request Nursing Facility Specialized Services for habilitative therapies for two (Resident #1 and Resident #2) of three residents reviewed for PASRR services. The facility failed to provide specialized services to Resident #1 and Resident #2. due to the facility not submitting the Nursing Facility Specialized Services (NFSS) request form in the LTC Portal. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving specialized PASRR services to enhance the resident's highest level of functioning and could contribute to a decline in physical, mental, psychosocial well-being and quality of life. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated, 12/19/2023 reflected an [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of : other psychotic disorder not due to a substance or know physiological condition ( a mental disorder that cause abnormal thinking and perceptions, and make 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 · Fcited before2023-07-14 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 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 kitchens reviewed for sanitation. The Director of Food and Nutrition failed to ensure all food items were labeled, dated, and properly stored. CK H failed to wash her hands after handling dirty dishes. These failures could place residents at risk of foodborne illness. Findings included: An observation of the reach-in refrigerator in the kitchen on 7/12/2023 at 7:08 a.m. revealed an opened container of mayonnaise dated 12/02/2022, a container of opened pickles dated 4/12/2023, and a plastic storage container filled with an unknown substance that was not labeled or dated. During an interview on 7/12/2023 at 7:10 a.m., CK H stated the dates on the mayonnaise and pickles were received dates and not opened dates. CK H stated food items needed to be labeled with an opened date when they were opened. CK H stated the unknown…
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 · E2023-07-14 · tag F0577 — patternAllow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews, and record review the facility failed to place most recent survey readily accessible to residents in a place most frequented by most residents have the most recent survey for 5 of 5 residents reviewed for resident group meeting. The facility failed to have the survey manual readily accessible for the residents to view the survey manual. This failure could place residents at risk of not being able to fully exercise their rights to be informed of the facility's survey citation history. Findings included: Observation on 07/13/2023 at 9:30 AM revealed the state survey manual was located behind the nurse's desk on the medical chart rack. There were 28 manuals located on the chart rack and it was difficult to locate the survey manual. Where the medical chart rack was located the resident would need to go behind the nurse's station to view the survey manual. It was not readily accessible for residents to view the survey. The survey manual was not placed in an area where the resident had easy access to it. The area where the survey manual was located 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 · Ecited before2023-07-14 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents unable to conduct activities of daily living (ADLs) received the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for four of 15 residents (Resident #23, Resident #28, Resident #45, and Resident #48) reviewed for quality of life. The facility failed to ensure Resident#23's, Resident #28's, Resident #45's, and Resident #48's fingernails were trimmed and cleaned. These failures could place residents at risk for poor hygiene, dignity issues and decreased quality of life. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #23's face sheet, dated 07/13/2023, reflected an 86 -year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications ( your body does not use insulin properly), unspecified lack of coordination ( uncoordinated movement), need for assistance with personal care (day- to- day activities people are unable 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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-07-14 · 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 ensure residents received services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of each resident's needs for 2 of 12 residents (Resident # 45, and Resident #23) reviewed for call lights in that Resident #45's and Resident #23's call lights were on the floor and not in reach. This failure could affect all residents who needed assistance with activities of daily living and could result in needs not being met. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #45's face sheet, dated 07/13/2023, reflected a 56 -year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side (Paralysis on the right side of the body due to tissue damage to the brain or spinal cord), muscle weakness generalized (decreased strength of the muscles), unsteadiness on feet (problems with walking can be due to disease or injury to the legs, feet, spine, or brain), and…
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 · D2023-07-14 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
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 all residents with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing for one (Resident #37) of eight residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility failed to promptly assess the size of Resident t#37's pressure ulcers. The facility failed to promptly input orders for would care for Resident #37's pressure ulcers. These failures could place residents at risk of worsened pressure ulcers. Findings included: A record review of Resident #37's face sheet dated 7/13/2023 reflected an [AGE] year-old female readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of chronic kidney disease (loss of kidney function), anemia (unhealthy red blood cells), atrial fibrillation (irregular heartbeat), cognitive communication deficit (problems with communication), dementia (symptoms affecting memory and thinking), heart failure,…
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 before2023-07-14 · 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 2 of 5 residents (Residents #7 and #9) reviewed for infection control. A) CNA E and F failed to practice appropriate hand hygiene and infection control techniques during incontinent care for Resident #7 B) CNA G and D failed to practice appropriate hand hygiene and infection control techniques during incontinent care for Resident #9 These failure could place residents at risk for developing infections. Findings included: A) Review of Resident #7's Face sheet dated 07/13/2023 reflected an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: chronic kidney disease (A condition characterized by a gradual loss of kidney function. Early stages can be asymptomatic. Disease progression…
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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to CREATIVE SOLUTIONS IN HEALTHCARE — 149 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 | 3 of 5 | 2.1 | +0.9 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.7 | +1.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.2 | +0.8 vs chain |
The other 148 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.1★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 148; 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WEST WHARTON COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 06/01/2022 |
| BOWERS, SEAN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 07/01/2024 |
| CISNEROS, ALFRED | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 02/18/2008 |
| COBB, TRAVIS | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 10/05/2022 |
| COOPER, STEPHEN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 11/11/2022 |
| HARDIN, SHERRIE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 09/04/2024 |
| KERZEE, RICHARD | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 09/24/2007 |
| KORENEK, PATRICIA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 05/05/2018 |
| SOECHTING, PAUL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 11/22/2024 |
| STRACK, JOE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 02/11/2022 |
| HUGGINS, LINDA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 06/01/2022 |
| WILLIG, ZACHARY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| THOMPSON, JOHNNY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| FRANKLIN II ENTERPRISES, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/15/2025 |
| BLAKE, GARY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/01/2022 |
| BLAKE, MALISA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 09/01/2022 |
| HERNANDEZ, CHARLES | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/15/2025 |
| PARSI, KIA | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 20 rows in the source record cover these 18 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 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
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 675897. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-11, 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.