Stonemere Rehabilitation Center

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.

59.0% 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 361 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 49.4% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 164 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: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.

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 136 beds and averages 94.6 residents a day — about 70% occupied, or roughly 41 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 3.33 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.31 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.71 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 2.98 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.47 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.31 to 0.31 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 34% is below 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 more than at the previous inspection — worsening. 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.

22 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 12 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2026-06-11 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — pattern
  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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services, including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals, to meet the needs of each resident for 1 (Medication Cart 3) of 3 carts and 1 of six residents (Resident #30) reviewed for pharmacy services. 1. The facility failed to ensure LVN D responsible for Medication Cart 3, counted controlled drugs every shift change on 06/01/2026, 06/04/2026, 06/05/2026, and 06/08/2026. 2. The facility failed to ensure LVN D documented administering prn cough medication to Resident #30 on 06/09/26. This failure could place residents at risk of not having the medication available due to possible drug diversion and residents may receive the wrong dose Findings Included: 1. Record review and observation on 06/09/26 at 1:27 PM of Medication Cart 3, with LVN C ,revealed missing signatures for Off going staff and On coming staff of the narcotic count sheet…

  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 · Ecited before2026-06-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen, in that: Dietary [NAME] G and the Dietary Manager failed to wear effective hair restraints during lunch meal preparation on 06/10/26. This failure could affect residents who received their meals from the facility's only kitchen, by placing them at risk for food-borne illness and food contamination. Findings included: Observation on 06/10/26 at 11:29 AM to 11:36 AM revealed Dietary [NAME] G was wearing a hat that did not cover 0.5 inches in front of both sides of her ears and about 0.5 inches of the back of their hair. Dietary [NAME] G was observed taking hot food temperatures of lunch food prior to serving. Dietary [NAME] G was putting food on residents' plates for lunch. Observation on 06/10/26 at 11:37 AM and 11:48 AM revealed the Dietary Manager was wearing a hat in which the back of his hair was uncovered about 2 inches, during food meal time at lunch. He went into walk-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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-06-11 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
  Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide the necessary services for residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for 1 (Resident #36) of 8 residents reviewed for ADLs. The facility failed to ensure Resident #36 had her fingernails cleaned on 6/9/26. This failure could place residents who were dependent on staff for ADL care at risk for loss of dignity, risk for infections and a decreased quality of life. Findings include: Record review of Resident #36's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #36 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses included cerebral infarction (the death of brain tissue caused by a prolonged lack of blood flow and oxygen), age related cognitive decline, and cognitive communication deficit. Her BIMS couldn't be done because Resident #36 was rarely or never understood. Resident #36's cognition was severely impaired. The MDS…

  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 · D2026-06-11 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for one (Resident #88) of two residents reviewed for incontinence care. The facility failed to ensure CNA A provided appropriate perineal care for Resident # 88 when she failed to clean the resident's labia on 6/9/26. This failure could place residents at risk for the development and/or worsening of urinary tract infections. Findings included: Record review of Resident #88's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 04/17/26, reflected a [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 11/03/22 with diagnoses included dementia (a group of thinking and social symptoms that interferes with daily functioning), cognitive communication deficit, and cerebral infarction (occurs when blood flow to a section of the brain is blocked or significantly reduced leading to the death of brain cells). Resident #88 had a BIMS score of 02…

  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 · D2026-06-11 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  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, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needed respiratory care, including tracheostomy care, was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for one (Resident #2) of one resident reviewed for tracheostomy (a surgical opening in the neck providing a direct airway through the trachea) care. The facility failed to ensure LVN E followed the procedure for tracheostomy care for Resident #2 on 06/10/26 by using sterile technique. This failure could place residents at risk for respiratory infections.Findings include:Record review of Resident #2's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 06/05/26, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her active diagnoses included acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (absence of oxygen), tracheostomy (a surgical procedure creating an opening in the neck to provide a direct airway). Resident #2 was unable to complete the BIMS. In Section O-Special Treatments,…

  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 before2026-06-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection control program designed to prevent the development and transmission of infection for 1 resident (Resident #10) of 3 observed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure CNA B changed gloves and completed hand hygiene during incontinent care for Resident #10 on 6/9/26. These failures could place residents at risk for infection and cross contamination of pathogens and illness.Findings include: Record review of Resident #10's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #10 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses included dementia (a decline in cognitive abilities, severe enough to interfere with daily life), cognitive communication deficit, and muscle weakness. Resident #10's BIMS score of 03, which indicated Resident #10's cognition was severely impaired. The MDS assessment indicated Resident #10 required assistance with toileting hygiene. Observation on…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-02 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that medications were secure and inaccessible to unauthorized staff and residents for one (Hall 200) of five medications carts reviewed for medication storage. The facility failed to ensure medication supplies were secured or attended by authorized staff when the medication cart on hall 200 was left unlocked by RN A. This failure could place residents at risk of having access to medications and/or lead to possible harm or drug diversions. Findings included: Observation on 04/02/2026 at 9:57 AM revealed a medication cart on Hall 200 unlocked with drawer pulled open. There was no nurse or medication aide observed anywhere near the medication cart. The medication cart was accessible to investigator to walk around the medication cart and access medications. Observations of Housekeeping staff, Hospice Aide, and Wound Care Nurse walking by the unsecured medication cart. At 10:02 AM RN A was observed walking out of a resident room down the hallway. Interview and observation with RN A on 04/02/2026 at 10:03 AM…

  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 · Dcited before2026-04-02 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for one of five (Resident #1) observed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure RN A sanitized the glucometer and surfaces with a recommended germicidal wipe by placing the clean, sanitized glucometer on top of an unsantized medication cart, on top of RN A's handwritten notes and then carried the glucometer into Resident #1's room, placed the glucometer on the unsantized overbed table and then back out to the medication cart. 2. The facility failed to ensure RN A prevented cross contamination of the insulin pin when RN A prepared and cleaned the tip of the insulin pin without wearing gloves, and then carried the insulin pin into Resident #1's room, raised his shirt, cleaned the skin, and injected insulin into…

  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 before2025-08-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to 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 one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to place Enhanced Barrier Precautions signage near Resident #1's room.2. CNA A and CNA B failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions while providing incontinent care to Resident #1. 3. CNA A failed to perform hand hygiene while providing incontinent care to Resident #1.These failures could place residents at risk for healthcare associated cross contamination and infections. Findings include:Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 08/19/25, reflected an [AGE] year-old male, who most recently admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included sepsis (a life-threatening complication of 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.

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-04-10 · tag F0645 — pattern
  PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
  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 the Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level I assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for two (Resident #15 and Resident #34) of five residents reviewed for PASRR Screenings. 1. The facility failed to ensure the accuracy of the PASRR Level 1 screen for Resident #15. The resident did not receive a PASRR Level II assessment Evaluation. 2. The facility failed to ensure the accuracy of the PASRR Level 1 screen for Resident #34. The resident did not receive a PASRR Level II assessment Evaluation. This failure could place residents who had a mental illness at risk of not receiving individualized specialized service to meet their needs. Findings included: Record review of Resident #15's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 01/27/2025, reflected the resident was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's BIMs score was 12 indicating the resident's cognition was moderately impaired. Her…

  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

“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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PARAMOUNT HEALTHCARE — 8 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 12 rows in the source record cover these 8 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.

3 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 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in TX