Renaissance Care Center
1400 Blackshill Dr, Gainesville, TX 76240 · For profit - Corporation · 91 certified beds · (940) 665-5221 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Feb 2025
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- a high number of inspection citations overall (30) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- 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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 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 improved from 1 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 | 14.2% | 15.8% | 15.4% | typical |
| 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 | 0.0% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.5% | 2.4% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger 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 | 2.8% | 3.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 8.8% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 22.9% | 18.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.5% | 3.8% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 7.8% | 13.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 9.2% | 9.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.9% | 88.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 27.7% | 25.7% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 6.7% | 12.3% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 3.58 | 2.17 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.36 | 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.
52.5% 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 98 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 65.2% 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 46 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 0.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 32% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 1% 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
| 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 | 52.5%CMS range 43.5–61.6 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 12.3%CMS range 7.6–16.8 | 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 | 65.2% | 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 | 71.7% | 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 | 50.0% | 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 | 98.4% | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 1.6% | 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 | 7.5%CMS range 4.4–13.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.03 | 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 91 beds and averages 66.4 residents a day — about 73% occupied, or roughly 25 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 3.04 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.46 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.57 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 2.55 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.24 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.43 to 0.53 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 49% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 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 fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
30 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 20 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-04 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan described the services that were to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for five of 15 residents (Residents #58 , #62, #51, #8, and #4) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. 1. The facility failed to include, in the care plan for Resident #58, his left-hand contracture and interventions to prevent further decline. 2. The facility failed to include, in the care plan for Resident #62, her contracture to her right hand and arm and interventions to prevent further decline. 3. The facility failed to develop care plans for Resident #51's Activity of Daily Living assistance needs, and his antianxiety medication. 4. The facility failed to develop a care plan for Resident #8's contractures in both hands and left elbow contracture. 5. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4's dementia diagnosis was care planned. These failures could…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-04 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — patternProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
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 with limited range of motion received appropriate treatment and services to increase range of motion and/or prevent further decrease in range of motion for two of five Residents (Resident #58 and Resident #62) reviewed for quality of care. 1. The facility failed to implement interventions to prevent further decline of Resident #58's contracture to his left hand and arm. 2. The facility failed to implement interventions to prevent further decline of Resident #62's contracture to her right hand and arm. This failure could place residents at risk for decline in range of motion, decreased mobility, and worsening of contractures. Findings included:1. Record review of Resident #58's Annual MDS assessment, dated 04/21/26, reflected a [AGE] year-old male with an admission date of 05/13/25. Resident #58 had BIMS score of 7 which indicated he was severely cognitively impaired. He required partial to moderate assistance for personal…
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 before2026-06-04 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on 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: 1. The facility failed to ensure refrigerator food items were dated when received, and freezer item were properly sealed on 06/02/26. 2. The Dietary Manager and Dietary [NAME] K failed to wear effective hair restraints during breakfast meal preparation on 06/04/26. These failures 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: 1. Observation of walk-in refrigerator on 06/02/26 at 8:59 AM revealed two packages of cabbage, were not dated when received, and two packages of carrots, were not dated when received. Observation of walk-in freezer on 06/02/26 at 9:02 AM revealed hamburger patties not sealed in the bag in an open box. Interview on 06/03/26 at 9:04 AM with the Dietary Manager revealed the carrots and cabbage must have been taken out of the original…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-04 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted 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 maintain medical records on each resident in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that are complete, accurately documented and systematically organized for one of eight (Resident #61) reviewed for administration. The facility failed to ensure staff documented Resident # 61's wound care on the MAR/TAR, that was provided or declined on 05/05/26, 05/07/26, 05/08/26, 05/12/26, 05/13/26, 05/15/26, 05/19/26, 05/21/26, 05/22/26, 05/25/26, 05/27/26, 05/28,26, 05/29/26, 05/31/26, and 06/03/26. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving treatments as ordered which could impact the residents' health and recovery. Findings included:Record review of Resident #61's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted [DATE]. She had a BIMS of 7 which indicated she was severely cognitively impaired, had a urinary catheter, and was dependent for all ADLS. Diagnoses included multiple…
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 before2026-06-04 · 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 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 two of five residents (Resident #58 and Resident #51) reviewed for quality of life. The facility failed to ensure Resident #58 had his nails cut and cleaned. The facility failed to ensure Resident #51's fingernails were trimmed. These failures could place residents, who were dependent on staff for ADL care, at a loss of dignity and a decreased quality of life. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #58's Annual MDS assessment, dated 04/21/26, reflected a [AGE] year-old male with an admission date of 05/13/25. Resident #58 had BIMS score of 7 which indicated he was severely cognitively impaired. He required partial to moderate assistance for personal hygiene and had not refused care. He had functional limitation in range of motion both upper and lower extremities on one side.…
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 before2026-06-04 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring and administering of all medications to meet the needs of each resident for one of eight residents (Resident #39) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure RN C followed the manufacturer's instructions to keep the needle in Resident #39's skin for 5 seconds to ensure complete administration of the Humalog insulin on 06/06/26. This failure placed residents at risk of not receiving the full dosage of medication. Findings included: Record review of Resident #39's, Face sheet, dated 06/04/26 reflected a [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 02/01/22. Resident #39 had a diagnosis which included Type 2 diabetes (condition where the body cannot control blood sugar and use it for energy) Record review of Resident #39's Physician's Orders for June 2026, reflected, Humalog Injection Solution 100 UNIT/ML (Insulin Lispro) Inject as per…
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 before2025-08-21 · 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 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 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) and 1 of 2 shower rooms observed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA A and CNA B performed hand hygiene between gloves changes while providing incontinence care to Resident #1 and failed to ensure CNA A used the required PPE for Resident #1, who was on enhanced barrier precautions due to a wound on her toe on her right foot, during incontinence care on 08/20/25. 2. The facility failed to ensure staff did not place soiled linens on the floor on the hall 500 shower room on 08/20/25. These failures could place the residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of infection.Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 08/20/25 reflected 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 · F2025-04-30 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespreadProvide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to have sufficient nursing staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing for 2 (Resident #61 and Resident #23) of 24 residents reviewed for staffing concerns. 1. The facility failed to ensure Residents #61 and #23 received consistent showers/bed baths on their shower days for the evenings of 6 pm to 6 am shift due to staffing issues. 2. The facility failed to ensure sufficient staff to meet resident needs in April 2025. These failures placed residents at risk of not getting needed care and services, a decrease in quality of care and quality of life and/or injury. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #61's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 03/21/25, reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. She had a BIMS score of 13, which indicated…
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 before2025-04-30 · 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
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 for the facility's only kitchen. 1. The facility failed to ensure stove grease trap was cleaned and emptied. 2. The facility failed to ensure cold food temperatures were at or below 40 degrees F for 3 menu items for lunch on 04/28/25. 3. The facility failed to ensure hot food temperatures were taken and were above 135 F for menu items for lunch on 04/28/25. 4. The facility failed to ensure Dietary Manager wore a facial restraint for his mustache during lunch meal preparation on 04/28/25. These failures 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 include: 1. Observation on 04/28/25 at 9:32 AM revealed the stove grease trap had black sticky substances covering the bottom about 1 inch thick and had with food debris. Interview on 04/28/25 at 9:33 AM with the Dietary Manager revealed he…
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 · E2025-04-30 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — patternHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure prompt efforts to resolve grievances for 6 (confidential residents) of 13 residents reviewed for grievances. The facility failed to provide a written response to the Resident Council addressing the grievances reported from their meetings on February 2025 and March 2025 which included ongoing issues with call light response times. These failures could place residents at risk of unresolved grievances, a decreased sense of self-worth, and a decline in quality of life. Findings Included: Record review of the Resident council meeting notes from February 19, 2025 reflected, .New Business .b. New Concerns: Aids do not answer call lights in timely manner , nurses need to help answer lights, especially emergency lights Record review of the Resident council meeting minutes from March 19, 2025 reflected, .New Business: a. Facility Updates, call lights are no being answered in a timely manner The minutes had no response to the same concern from February 19, 2025. Record review of the Grievance logs for February 2025, March 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.
Show the remaining 20 citations
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-30 · 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 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 2 of 8 residents (Resident #61 and Resident #23) reviewed for ADLs. 1. The facility failed to ensure staff provided consistent showers/baths for Resident #61. 2. The facility failed to ensure staff provided consistent bed baths on 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. shift on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays for Resident #23. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving needed hygiene care which could cause skin breakdown, a loss of dignity and self-worth. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #61's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 03/21/25, reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. She had a BIMS score of 13, which indicated she was cognitively intact. She had not rejected care and required supervision and touch assistance…
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 · E2025-04-30 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — patternEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who is fed by enteral means receives the appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding for two of seven residents (Resident #171 and Resident #21) reviewed for quality of care. 1. The facility failed to ensure LVN A followed physician ordered water flushes between each medication administration given via the G-Tube for Resident #171 on 04/28/25. 2. The facility failed to ensure LVN J followed physician ordered water flushes between each medication administration given via the G-Tube for Resident #21 on 04/28/25. These failures could place residents at risk of nausea, shortness of breath and a decrease potential fluid overload. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #171's face sheet dated 04/30/25 reflected a [AGE] year-old male with and admission date 04/23/25. Diagnoses included dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), cerebral vascular accident (stroke), atrial fibrillation…
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 before2025-04-30 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide 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, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents goals and preferences for two of three (Resident #170, and Resident #52) reviewed for respiratory care. 1. The facility failed to have Physician orders for the use of Oxygen and the amount to be administered to Resident #170 upon her admission to the facility on [DATE]. 2. The facility failed to have Physician orders for the use of Oxygen and the amount to be administered to Resident #52 upon his re-admission to the facility on [DATE]. These failures could place residents at risk of receiving an incorrect amount of oxygen and the risk of oxygen toxicity (occurs when the body inhales too much supplemental oxygen which can damage the lungs and affect the central nervous system). Findings include: 1. 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 · Ecited before2025-04-30 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring and administering of all medications to meet the needs of each resident for one of seven residents (Resident #55) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure Resident # 55's discontinued Lorazepam 2mg/ml was removed from the Refrigerator in the Medication room. These failures could place residents at risk of nausea, shortness of breath and a decrease potential fluid overload. Findings include: During an observation of the facility's one Medication room on 04/30/25 at 11:41 a.m. with the ADON, revealed one medication was observed in the locked compartment of the medication rooms refrigerator. The lock box contained a vial of Lorazepam 2mg/ml for Resident #55. The fill date of the prescription was 07/19/25 with an expiration date 07/19/25. Record review of the Narcotic count sheet for Resident #55's Lorazepam 2mg/ml revealed the last time the medication was administered was on 01/25/24 with remaining amount…
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 before2025-04-30 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to 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 18 residents (Resident #171 and Resident #55) observed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure LVN A used the required PPE for Resident #171, who was on enhanced barrier precautions due to his g-tube (a tube inserted through the abdomen that delivers nutrition directly to the stomach), while administering residents' medication through the g-tube on 04/28/25. The facility failed to ensure Resident #171's room had a sign reflecting she was on enhanced barrier precautions. 2. The facility failed to ensure CNA K performed hand hygiene while providing incontinence care to Resident #55 on 04/28/25 and failed to ensure CNA K and Hospitality Aide D performed hand hygiene before leaving the resident's room. These…
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 · D2025-04-30 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, were reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, if the events that caused the allegation involved abuse or resulted in serious bodily injury to the administrator of the facility and to the other officials, including to the State Survey Agency, in accordance with State law through the established procedures for one of 7 residents (Resident #66) reviewed for abuse and neglect . The facility failed to report allegations of neglect and abuse which involved Resident #66 to the Administrator and appropriate State Agency immediately on 04/26/25. This failure could place residents at risk of abuse and neglect. Findings Include: Record review of Resident #66's admission MDS assessment, dated 4/26/25, reflected an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-30 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to have evidence that all alleged violations were thoroughly investigated for one of 7 residents (Resident #66) reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility failed to ensure allegations of abuse and neglect were investigated when Resident #66 reported an allegation of abuse and neglect to the facility. This failure could place residents at risk for abuse and neglect . Findings Include: Record review of Resident #66's admission MDS assessment, dated 4/26/25, reflected an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. She had little to no cognitive impairment and had a BIMs of 15 . Her active diagnoses included coronary artery disease (a heart condition where plaque builds up inside the coronary arteries), Hypertension (elevated blood pressure), Ulcer (the break or erosion in the lining of an organ or tissue), Diabetes (a disease that results in too much sugar in the blood), Thyroid Disorder(a condition that prevents your thyroid from…
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 · D2025-04-30 · 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 label drugs and biologicals used in the facility in accordance with currently accepted professional principles, and include the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions, and the expiration date when applicable for the facility's one medication room reviewed for storage. The facility failed to ensure a vial of TB PPD, that was opened and used, was not dated in the medication room refrigerator. This failure could affect residents and staff resulting in diminished effectiveness, and not receiving the therapeutic benefits of the medications. The findings included: An observation on 04/30/25 at 11:35 a.m. of the medication room refrigerator with the ADON revealed an undated open vial of Tuberculin Purified protein derivative. The ADON stated it appeared one dose might have been used out of the multi dose vial. In an interview with the ADON on 04/30/25 at 11:41a.m. he stated the TB PPD had to be dated when opened. He stated once it was open it would only be good for 30 days. He stated the risk of not dating…
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 · E2025-02-05 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — patternProvide 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 three of five residents (Resident #2, Resident #4, and Resident #8) reviewed for catheter and incontinence care. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA A and CNA B maintained the foley catheter drainage bag below Resident #2's bladder while they transferred the resident with a mechanical lift on 02/04/25 2. The facility failed to ensure CNA C provided Resident #4 timely and appropriate perineal care after an incontinent episode when she failed to check and change the resident from 06:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. and failed to clean the resident's penis and scrotum from front to back on 02/05/24. 3. The facility failed to ensure CNA C provided timely incontinence care for Resident #8 on 02/05/25. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving appropriate care to address their incontinence and could…
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 before2025-02-05 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide 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 three of eight residents (Residents #4, #5, and #6) reviewed for medications and for 1 (nurses cart hall 300/400) of 2 medication carts reviewed for pharmacy services in that: 1. The Nurses Cart Hall 300/400 had 1 insulin pen for Resident #5 with an expired open date of [DATE] and 1 insulin pen for Resident #6 with no open date . Observation of the pen reflected it was not full and it was used. 2. The facility failed to administer Resident #4's Phenobarbital (treats seizures) according to doctor's orders on [DATE] and [DATE]. These failures placed residents at risk of not receiving the therapeutic benefits of the medications. The Findings included: 1. Observation on [DATE] at 09:40 AM of nurses cart hall 300/400, with LVN F revealed: - The pen…
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 before2025-02-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, 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 kitchen reviewed for Food and Nutrition Services. 1. The facility failed to ensure the walk-in freezer was free of ice accumulation. 2. The facility failed to ensure Dietary [NAME] O used proper hand hygiene while handling and serving food during the lunch meal preparation and service on 02/04/25. These failures could place residents at risk for food-borne illness if consumed and food contamination. Findings included: 1. Observation on 02/04/25 at 9:13 AM of the walk-in freezer revealed ice accumulation of about 4 ft length x 3 ft wide including icicles up to 2 inches covering the ceiling. There was an ice thickened patch of about 2 ft length x 1 foot length in the back right corner of the walk-in freezer. There were ice particles and patches of ice covering the floor of the walk-in freezer. There were ice patches near the door of the walk-in freezer. The freezer door was difficult 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 · Ecited before2025-02-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, 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 four of eight Residents (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #4, and Resident #8) observed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA A used the required PPE for Resident #1, who was on enhanced barrier precautions due to her venous access device, while assisting resident with toileting on 02/04/25 and failed to perform hand hygiene before and after assistance. 2. The facility failed to ensure CNA A and CNA B used the required PPE for Resident #2, who was on enhanced barrier precautions due to her foley catheter, while performing a mechanical lift transfer on 02/04/25. 3. The facility failed to ensure that CNA C changed her gloves and performed hand hygiene before moving to the clean supplies after completion of incontinence care to Resident #4 and before leaving the resident's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-02-05 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — patternKeep all essential equipment working safely.
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 maintain equipment in safe operating condition in facility's kitchen reviewed for physical environment. 1. The facility failed to ensure the walk-in freezer was in good repair and free of ice accumulation on 02/04/25. 2. The facility failed to ensure 3-compartment sink was not leaking underneath from the pipe. 3. The facility failed to ensure the steam table did not have 3 missing knobs while in use for lunch on 02/04/25. This failure could place a potential for fire hazard risk in the facility kitchen with equipment not in safe operating condition. Findings included: 1. Observation on 02/04/25 at 9:13 AM of the walk-in freezer revealed ice accumulation of about 4 ft length x 3 ft wide including icicles up to 2 inches covering the ceiling. There was an ice thickened patch of about 2 ft length x 1 foot length in the back right corner of the walk-in freezer. There were ice particles and patches of ice covering the floor of the walk-in freezer. There were ice patches near the door of the walk-in freezer. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-05 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse for one (Resident #9) of four residents reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to protect Resident #9 from verbal abuse by LVN E on 07/26/2024 at 9:15 AM. The noncompliance was identified as Past Noncompliance (PNC). The noncompliance began on 07/26/2024 at 9:15 AM and ended on 08/01/2024. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the incident investigation began on 02/04/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of serious injury and harm. Findings included: Record review of Resident #9's face sheet, undated, reflected she was an [AGE] year-old female, admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses of stroke and dementia (loss of cognition). Record review of Resident #9's Comprehensive MDS, dated [DATE], reflected she had a memory problem and had severely impaired cognition. Record review of Resident #9's care plan, undated, reflected she needed extensive assistance 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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-02-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents receive adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for one of nine residents (Resident #1) reviewed for quality of care. The Facility failed to ensure CNA A used a gait belt when transferring Resident #1 from her wheelchair to the toilet on and off the toilet on 02/04/25. These failures could affect the residents by placing the residents at risk for falls, injuries, and skin tears. Findings included: Record Review of Resident #1's 5-day MDS assessment, dated 01/16/25 reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 was cognitively intact with a BIMs of 15. She had limited range of motion of one side of her lower extremities and was dependent with toileting hygiene and toilet transfers. She was occasionally incontinent of bladder and bowel. She was mobile with a wheelchair and was receiving physical and occupational therapy. Diagnoses included osteomyelitis of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-02-15 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to 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 two (Residents #12 and #18) of seven residents observed for infection control. 1. CNA T failed to perform hand hygiene between glove changes, and when she went from dirty to clean during incontinence care for Resident #12. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #18's nasal cannula oxygen was not lying on wheelchair seat when not in use. These failures placed residents at risk for spread of infection through cross-contamination. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #12's face sheet dated 02/15/2024 reflected she was [AGE] years old female. She was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. She was admitted with the diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease, osteoarthritis (is a degenerative joint disease that causes pain,…
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 · D2024-02-15 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to respect the residents' right to confidentiality in his or her personal and medical records for one (Medication Cart Hall 100-200 Computer) of three medication cart computers reviewed for confidential medical records. LVN A failed to lock Medication Cart Hall 100-200 Computer, used for documenting residents' health information, and left Resident #25's information exposed. This failure could place residents at risk of resident-identifiable information being accessed by unauthorized persons. Findings included: Observation on 02/14/2024 at 11:03 AM revealed a computer on LVN C's medication cart (Medication Cart Hall 100-200 Computer) in front of room (111) was left unlocked and unattended with resident information available for 5 minutes from 11:03 AM to 11:08 AM. Resident #25's name, date of birth , allergies and part of her medication orders records were exposed while LVN C stepped away from her cart to assist other residents in the next door room (109). Interview on 02/14/2024 at 11:09 AM with LVN C revealed…
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 · D2024-02-15 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure resident has a right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment for one (Resident #7) of 24 residents reviewed for safe and sanitary environment. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7's mattress was free of stain and in good condition. This failure could place residents at risk for an unsanitary and hazardous living conditions. Findings included: Review of Resident #7's admission MDS assessment dated reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] diagnoses of acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (condition where you don't have enough oxygen in the tissues in your body), arthritis and hip fracture. Resident #7 had a BIMS of 13 indicating she was cognitively intact. Observation and interview on 02/13/24 10:41 AM revealed Resident # 7's mattress had a yellowish/brownish stain on left middle side about 2.5 feet in length by a foot wide. Resident #7 stated she had noticed the stain on 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-15 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights, that include measurable objectives and time frames to meet Residents' mental and psychosocial needs for 2 (Residents #54 and Resident #44) of 24 residents reviewed for care plans. 1- The facility did not develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan to address Resident #54's dependence on indwelling urinary catheter. 2- The facility failed to develop a care plan for Resident #44's communication deficit related to diagnoses of aphasia and apraxia. These failures could place resident at risk of not having a plan developed to address care needs. Findings included: 1- Resident #54 Review of Resident #54's admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #54 was [AGE] year-old Female admitted to facility on 10/6/2023. Relevant diagnoses include Cancer, Anemia (Lower amount of healthy red blood cells ),…
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 before2024-02-15 · 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 observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that a Resident who needs respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 3 Residents (#26) reviewed for respiratory care, in that: Resident #26 oxygen concentrator's humidifier bottle was not labeled or dated which was a facility policy requirement. These failures could place residents who received oxygen therapy at risk of respiratory infections. The findings were: Review of Resident #26's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] reflected Resident #26 was an [AGE] year-old Male admitted in the facility on 8/3/2023. Relevant diagnoses include coronary artery disease (a condition that affects heart), Heart failure (a serious condition in which the heart doesn't pump blood as efficiently as it should), Hypertension (high blood pressure), and Pneumonia (an infection that affects one or both legs). The Quarterly MDS reflected Resident #26 was on oxygen therapy. Review of Resident #26's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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 CANTEX CONTINUING CARE — 37 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 | 3.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.9 | +0.1 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.9 | -0.9 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
The other 36 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.1★, per CMS)
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DALLAS COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 09/01/2019 |
| CASTANEDA, EDMUNDO | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/10/2022 |
| CERISE, FREDERICK | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 03/24/2014 |
| GAINESVILLE HEALTH CARE CENTER LTD. CO | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/04/2025 |
| FULKERSON, JON | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/02/2024 |
| BELL, JOSEPH | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/02/2025 |
| BRATTY, JERRY | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/02/2025 |
| BRATTY, RUDOLPH | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/02/2025 |
| LONGO, AMEDEO | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/03/2025 |
| LONGO, DEAN | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/03/2025 |
| LONGO, LAWRENCE | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/02/2025 |
| LONGO, PETER | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/02/2025 |
| PANTALONE, ROCCO | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/03/2025 |
| SANTOS, JENNIFER | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/03/2025 |
| UNDERHILL, ROBIN | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/02/2025 |
| CANTEX HEALTH CARE CENTERS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2024 |
| COHNREZNICK LLP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2024 |
| FIRST COOKE CAPITAL FUNDING LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/05/2019 |
| JNC CONSULTANT PHARMACY SERVICES, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2024 |
| PIVOT REHABILITATION SERVICES | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 07/01/2024 |
| STEPHEN DUCK, CPA PC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/06/2022 |
| LEE, MARY | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/13/2025 |
| SHARMA, NEERAJ | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2021 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 25 rows in the source record cover these 23 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.
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
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 675441. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-06-04, 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.