No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Victoria Gardens of Frisco

10700 Rolater Dr., Frisco, TX 75035 · For profit - Corporation · 118 certified beds · (972) 712-8652 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (972) 712-8652 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0604) — cited Oct 20242 immediate-jeopardy citations CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$23,546 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0604), cited Oct 2024
  • inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $23,546 in federal fines (most recent 2025-02-25)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)

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.

4/5
CMS overall
4 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
7010 Preston Rd Ste 240 · (972) 377-2446 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
7447 Hillcrest Rd Ste 105a · (972) 292-9693 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Kroger0.9 mi
7500 Preston Rd · (972) 377-0850 · Call to confirm hours
Park
9700 Snowberry Dr · (972) 292-6500 · Typically dawn to dusk

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 4 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 held steady at 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.

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased12.8%15.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight2.2%3.0%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.3%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%0.8%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms4.4%2.4%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury3.8%3.3%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened16.9%14.0%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication27.6%18.0%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.3%3.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control13.1%13.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table5.5%9.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.4%1.5%1.4%typical
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine87.2%88.0%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission30.2%25.7%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit7.9%12.3%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.812.171.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.222.061.80worse

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

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

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

54.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 42 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

54.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
48.0%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.90U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.39hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.38hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.13hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 48.0% 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 25 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 0.90 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 96% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF54.2%CMS range 38.7–67.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.2%CMS range 6.5–13.210.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 discharge48.0%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 discharge52.0%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge32.0%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 identified97.4%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 settingnot 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 dischargenot 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 stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.7%CMS range 3.8–11.67.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.051.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.41
RN hours/ resident / day
0.87
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.04
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.32
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.32
RN hoursweekends
46.3%
Total nursing turnover
20.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 118 beds and averages 83.9 residents a day — about 71% occupied, or roughly 34 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.32 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.41 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.04 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 2.86 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.50 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.45 to 0.32 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 46% is about the same as 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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-05-29)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-04-18)

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

15 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-02-25 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that each resident receives adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 (Resident #1) of 4 residents reviewed for accidents. On 2/22/2025 Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) A attempted to perform a 1-person transfer, with a Hoyer lift, on Resident #1 who required a 2-person transfer with a Hoyer lift. CNA A was unable to complete the transfer and dropped Resident #1 on the floor. This was determined to be past non-compliance immediate jeopardy from 2/22/2025 to 2/22/2025 due to the facility having implemented actions that corrected the non-compliance prior to the beginning of the survey. This failure could place residents at risk of serious injury or death. The findings included: Review of the Care Plan dated 2/25/2025 documented Resident #1 was a [AGE] year old female admitted on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses including Dysphagia, Lymphedema, Alzheimer's Disease, Depression, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Psychotic…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2024-10-23 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
    Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
    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 residents the right to be free of any physical restraints imposed for purposes of discipline or convenience, and not required to treat the resident's medical symptoms for one (Resident #1) of five residents reviewed for restraints. The facility failed on 09/09/24 to ensure Resident #1 remained free of any physical restraint in that: the movement of Resident #1's head and mouth were restricted by physical force applied by the hands of OT A. The noncompliance was identified as past noncompliance (PNC). The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) began on 09/09/24 and ended on 09/09/24. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the state's investigation began. This failure could place residents at risk for associated risks of potential physical injury or psychological harm. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] reflected an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-14 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
    Reasonably 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 the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences except when to do so would endanger the health or safety of the resident or other residents for one (Resident #1) of four residents reviewed for call lights.The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's call light was within reach of the resident. This failure could place the residents at risk of falling, injury, and feelings of low self-worth due to not being able to call for help. Findings included:Review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 01/14/26, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female, admitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included muscle wasting and atrophy (loss of muscle mass and strength), bi-polar disorder, depression, history of stroke (a blood clot in the brain, which damages the brain), seizures, reduced mobility, and anxiety disorder. She also had diagnoses of cognitive, speech 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-12-08 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet, dated 10/23/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with obesity (excessive accumulation of body fats) and dementia (a condition characterized by loss of memory and ability to reason). Record review of Resident #1's Comprehensive MDS (assessment used to determine functional capabilities and health needs) Assessment, dated 10/02/2025, reflected the resident had as severe impairment (resident required significant assistance and support in daily life) in cognition with a BIMS (screening tool used to assess cognitive status) score of 03. The Comprehensive MDS Assessment indicated the resident had dementia and obesity. Record review of Resident #1's Comprehensive Care Plan, dated 10/12/2025, reflected the resident had the potential for impaired skin integrity and one of the interventions was to provide proper skin care. Record review of Resident #1's Physician Order, dated 10/08/2025,…

    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 before2025-05-29 · 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, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the facility's only kitchen reviewed for food safety. 1. The facility failed to ensure all foods stored in the refrigerator or freezer was covered, labeled, and dated. 2. The facility failed to ensure wrappers of frozen food stayed intact until thawing. These failures could place residents at risk for food-borne illness and cross contamination. Findings Include: Observation of the dining room on 5/27/2025 at 9:04 a.m., revealed the following: -1 large pitcher of drink not labeled or dated. Observation of the refrigerator on 5/27/2025 at 9:08 a.m., revealed the following: -4 trays of drinks not labeled or dated. Observation of the walk-in freezer on 5/27/2025 at 9:13 a.m., revealed the following: -1 29.7 lb box of biscuits dated 5/22/2025 exposed to the air. -1 20lb box of frozen vegetables dated 5/8/2025 exposed to the air. In an interview with [NAME] A on 05/27/2025 at 11:45 a.m., she stated all…

    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 · D2025-05-29 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to submit and complete accurate request and recommendations from a PASRR (Preadmission Screening and Resident Review) evaluation report for a low air loss mattress within 20 days after the IDT meeting for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for PASRR services. The facility did not submit a complete and accurate request for a low air loss mattress for Resident #1 within 20 days after the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) meeting held on 12/20/2024. The past noncompliance began on 12/20/2024 and ended on 03/17/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving specialized PASRR services which would enhance their highest level of functioning and could contribute to residents decline in physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's MDS assessment, dated 02/24/2025, revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Dementia without behavioral disturbances,…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · D2024-06-13 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual 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 interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 residents reviewed for meals. -The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's mechanical soft fish was free of small bones. This failure placed all residents, especially those with swallowing issues, at risk of aspirating or choking. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 06/13/24, reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included: dementia (loss of memory and thinking), diverticulitis of intestine (small, inflamed pockets in intestine), type II diabetes, and dysphasia (difficulty swallowing). Record review of Resident #1's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 05/16/24, reflected her BIMS score was 14, which indicated cognition was intact. Further review reflected Resident #1 required a mechanically altered therapeutic diet . 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-04-18 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible for four (Resident #12, #18, #44, and one unknown resident) of six residents reviewed for adequate supervision to prevent accidents. The facility failed to ensure resident safety, as evidenced by: The door of the central supply closet, that contained direct care products: mouth wash, razors, shaving cream, toothpaste, denture cleaner, conditioning shampoo, body lotion, and orange stick located on Hall 400 was open and accessible to residents. Resident #12, a confused resident, was in close proximity to the central supply, with no staff within line of sight of the supply closet. The facility failed to properly maintain wheelchairs for Residents #12, #18, and #44. These deficient practices could place residents at risk for ingesting direct care products, fall, and exposure to skin tears that could be detrimental to his or her health, resulting in illness 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-04-18 · 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 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 safety. 1. The facility failed to ensure the ice machine filter and vent were free from dirt and dust. 2. The facility failed to ensure the ice machine chute guard was clean. 3. The facility failed to ensure food items in the refrigerator (1 of 2), freezer and dry storage room were labeled and stored in accordance with the professional standards for food service. 3. The facility failed to discard items stored in refrigerator, freezers and dry storage that were not properly labeled or past the 'best buy', consume by or expiration dates. 4. The facility failed to ensure multiple food items stored in a bin/container were clearly identifiable. 5. The facility failed to inspect produce inventory and monitor for spoilage or over ripening and to discard spoiled, moldy, or over ripened food items. These failures could place residents at risk for food-borne…

    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 · E2024-04-18 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — pattern
    Make sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program so that the facility was free of pests for two (Halls 100, 400) of two halls, the facility's only nurse's station, and only dining room, observed for pest control program. The facility had live flies various in areas of the facility including the nurse's station, Halls 100, 400, and the dining room. This failure could place residents at risk for spread of infection, cross-contamination, and decreased quality of life. Findings Included: The facility had live flies in areas of the facility including the nurse's station, Halls 100, 400, and the main dining room. This failure could place residents at risk for spread of infection, cross-contamination, and decreased quality of life. Findings Include: Observation on 04/16/24 at 09:15 a.m. a fly flew around the ceiling light in the conference room, then landing on the table. Observation on 04/16/24 at 9:25 a.m. there was a fly in the central supply room at the end of Hall 400, crawling on the open boxes that had formula…

    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.

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-03-22 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — pattern
    Reasonably 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 the residents received services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of each resident's needs for 3 of 9 residents (Resident #1, #20 and #21) reviewed for accommodation of needs in that: The facility failed to ensure that Resident #1, #20 and #21's call lights were in reach. This failure could affect all residents who needed assistance and could result in needs not being met. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet, dated 3-21-2024, indicated a [AGE] year-old-female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 had a primary diagnosis of osteomyelitis (inflammation of bone or bone marrow, usually due to infection), multiple sclerosis (a disease in which the immune system eats away at the protective covering of nerves), sepsis (a life-threatening complication of an infection), and glaucoma (a group of eye conditions that can cause blindness). Record review of Resident #1's MDS, dated [DATE], revealed 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-12-16 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolated
    Provide appropriate foot care.
    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 residents receive proper treatment and care to maintain good foot health for one (Resident #2) of one resident reviewed for foot care. The facility failed to provide foot care for Resident #2. This failure could affect residents by placing them at risk for poor foot health, decreased personal hygiene, and a decline in their quality of life. Findings included: Review of Resident #2's face sheet, dated 12/06/23, revealed the resident was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (lack of oxygen), schizoaffective disorder (mood disorder), vascular dementia (memory loss), bipolar disorder (mood swings), hypertension (high blood pressure). Review of Resident #2's MDS assessment, dated 11/21/23 revealed her cognition was severely impaired. The MDS reflected Resident #2 was dependent for personal hygiene. Review of Resident #2's care plan, dated 6/24/22…

    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 · D2023-12-16 · tag F0810 — isolated
    Provide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
    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 special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them for one (Resident #1) of two resident reviewed for meal service. The facility failed to provide Resident #1 a divided plate or plate guard at breakfast on 12/06/23 to assist her with eating independently. This failure could place residents at risk for loss of self-worth and empowerment for independent eating, which could lead to unplanned weight loss. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] Her diagnosis included encephalopathy (alter brain function), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (difficulty breathing), hemiplegia (paralysis), and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting left non-dominant side and vascular dementia (one sided muscle weakness). Her ADL functional status for eating revealed she required supervision for self-performance 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-03-02 · 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 observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure food was stored, prepared, distributed and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation. 1. The facility failed to ensure food located in the kitchen, dry food pantry, and prep areas were labeled and dated. 2. The facility failed to ensure that staff working in the kitchen had fingernails free of nail polish, dip polish, and artificial nails while conducting dietary duties. 3. The facility failed to ensure that the deep fryer grease was clean and free of buildup from dark (expresso-colored) brown oil, grime, crumbs from previously fried food. 4. The facility failed to cover the clean plates stacked and stored in the plate warmer. 5. The facility failed to cover the iced tea container at the top to prevent exposure. These failures placed residents at risk for cross contamination and other bacteria illnesses. Findings include: An observation on 02/28/2023 at 9:10 AM revealed the following food in the dry pantry:…

    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 · D2023-03-02 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights set forth at §483.10(c)(2) and §483.10(c)(3), that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for Care Plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4's Care Plan included goals and interventions for her (high-risk) psychological medication, anticoagulant medication, and the correct information for advanced directives. This failure could place residents at risk of their needs not being met. Findings include: Review of Resident #4's Face Sheet, dated 03/01/23, revealed She was a [AGE] year-old female re-admitted on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included high blood pressure, heart beat dysfunction, type 2 diabetes (insulin resistance), anxiety (feelings of fear, dread,…

    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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

$23,546 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

  • $9,113 — penalty dated 2025-02-25
  • $14,433 — penalty dated 2024-10-23

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to PRIORITY MANAGEMENT — 38 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 4 of 52.9+1.1 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 53.2+0.8 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 51.6+0.4 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 53.4+0.6 vs chain
The other 37 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
1 of 5Alpine Skilled Nursing and RehabilitationRuston, LA 1 of 5Bridgeport Medical LodgeBridgeport, TX 1 of 5Camelot Rehabilitation At Magnolia ParkLafayette, LA 1 of 5Colonial Oaks Skilled Nursing and RehabilitationBossier City, LA 1 of 5Hilltop Park Rehabilitation And Care CenterWeatherford, TX 1 of 5Pilgrim Manor Skilled Nursing and RehabilitationBossier City, LA 1 of 5Shreveport Manor Skilled Nursing & RehabilitationShreveport, LA 1 of 5St Joseph Skilled Nursing and RehabilitationMonroe, LA 1 of 5The Bradford Skilled Nursing And RehabilitationShreveport, LA 1 of 5The Guest House Skilled Nursing and RehabilitationShreveport, LA 2 of 5Booker T. Washington Skilled Nursing and RehabilitShreveport, LA 2 of 5Decatur Medical LodgeDecatur, TX 2 of 5Resthaven Living CenterBogalusa, LA 2 of 5Ridgmar Medical LodgeFort Worth, TX 3 of 5Broadmoor Medical LodgeRockwall, TX 3 of 5Camelot Of BroussardBroussard, LA 3 of 5Chateau St. James Rehab And RetirementLutcher, LA 3 of 5Louisiana Extended Care Hospital Of LafayetteLafayette, LA 3 of 5Mabank Nursing CenterMabank, TX 3 of 5Royse City Medical LodgeRoyse City, TX 3 of 5The Homestead of DenisonDenison, TX 3 of 5The Woodlands Healthcare CenterLeesville, LA 3 of 5Timber Springs Rehab and RetirementSpringhill, LA 4 of 5Belterra Health & RehabMcKinney, TX 4 of 5College Park Rehabilitation And Care CenterWeatherford, TX 4 of 5Jo Ellen Smith Convalescent CenterNew Orleans, LA 4 of 5Mansfield Medical LodgeMansfield, TX 4 of 5The Parks at Garland Healthcare and RehabGarland, TX 4 of 5Victoria Gardens Of AllenAllen, TX 4 of 5Vista Ridge Nursing & Rehabilitation CenterLewisville, TX 4 of 5Windmill Village Rehabilitation & Care CenterLubbock, TX 5 of 5Camelot BrooksideJennings, LA 5 of 5Chateau D'Ville Rehab and RetirementDonaldsonville, LA 5 of 5Chateau Terrebonne Health Care CenterHouma, LA 5 of 5Grapevine Medical LodgeGrapevine, TX 5 of 5Spring Lake Skilled Nursing And RehabilitationShreveport, LA 5 of 5Springtown Park Rehabilitation And Care CenterSpringtown, TX

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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
BAUDER FAMILY INVESTMENTS, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST33%since 04/01/2024
BOULWARE ST JAMES LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST33%since 04/01/2024
STEVEN BOULWARE FAMILY INVESTMENTS LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST33%since 04/01/2024
BAUDER, KELLYIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF8%since 04/01/2024
BAUDER, MADISONIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF8%since 04/01/2024
BAUDER, PARKERIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF8%since 04/01/2024
BOULWARE, THOMASIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF8%since 04/01/2024
WALKER, KATIEIndividual5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF8%since 04/01/2024
BOULWARE, DOUGLASIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2024
BOULWARE, SANDRAIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 04/01/2024
BAUDER, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2024
BOULWARE, STEVENIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2024
MILLER, BOBBIEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 04/01/2024
BRIDGEPOINTE FINANICAL SERVICES, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2024
INNOVATIVE NURSE CONSULTING, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2024
PRIORITY MANAGEMENT GROUP, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2024
PROGRESSIVE REHAB SOLUTIONS, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2024
AHMED, MD JEWELIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2024
WASHINGTON, MICHAELIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2024
PMG REALCO-FRISCO, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2024

CMS files one row per role, so the 35 rows in the source record cover these 20 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

8 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.

$6.4M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-38.3%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$351K
Related-party expense4% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 74%Medicare 5%Other / private 21%

About 74% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $351K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$341per resident / day
operating cost
$10,362per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$246per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Texas
$5,627/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$7,604/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,666/mo
Assisted living

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 675811. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-05-29, 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.

What to do next