Glen Rose Nursing and Rehab Center

Location & what’s nearby

Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

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

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

69.5% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 87 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 72.1% 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 68 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 0.33 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 55% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 118 beds and averages 88.7 residents a day — about 75% occupied, or roughly 29 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 3.39 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.27 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.14 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 2.78 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.64 on weekdays — 23% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.28 to 0.24 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 38% 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

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

20 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.

• Actual harm · G2025-05-11 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
  Protect 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to keep the residents free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation for 2 (Resident #1, Resident #2) of 7 residents reviewed. The facility failed to prevent Resident #2 from being slapped by her spouse which led to redness to the cheek. The facility failed to prevent verbal abuse to Resident #1 by a hospitality aide (HA). The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The noncompliance began 3/2/25 and ended on 4/24/25. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the investigation began. This failure could place the residents at risk of physical harm, pain, or mental anguish. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's electronic health record revealed a [AGE] year-old male, admission date 9/16/24, Diagnoses: delusional disorder (persistent false beliefs that are not based on reality), impulse disorder (difficult to resist urges), cerebral infarction (blood flow to brain is blocked), senile degeneration of brain…

  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
• Actual harm · G2024-01-05 · 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 residents received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for accidents. (Resident #1) The facility did not ensure Resident #1 had the chair/bed alarm in place while resident #1 was sitting in the reclining chair. The resident fell and fractured her nose. This failure could place the only resident using a bed/chair alarm as an assistive device at risk for accidents or falls. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's Face sheet dated 12/29/2023 revealed a [AGE] year-old, admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses of Alzheimer's Disease, Dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), Cognitive Communication Deficit, Repeated Falls, Anxiety Disorder, Osteoporosis, and Unspecified Dementia. Review of quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE], indicated Resident #1 had a BIMS (Brief Interview for Mental Status) of 00, which indicated a severe cognitive impairment and indicated 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-01-15 · 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 for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed food safety. The facility failed to ensure foods were labeled properly in the kitchen. The facility failed to dispose of foods after the use by / shelf life date.These failures could place residents that eat out of the kitchen at risk for food borne illnesses.Findings includedDuring an observation on 1/13/2026 between 8:48 a.m. and 9:05 a.m., the kitchen revealed: Dry Storage: 1. Opened bag of potato chips in a see-through plastic bag that was closed to air not labeled with open date. 2. Opened bag of what appeared to be ten slices of bread stored outside of the original container not labeled with description, open date, or use by date. Refrigerator:1. Opened bag of sliced white cheese stored outside of the original container not labeled with use by date.2. Opened bag of what appeared to be sliced yellow cheese stored outside of the original container not labeled 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-15 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  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 review, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to formulate an advanced directive for 1 of 18 (Resident #13) residents reviewed for advanced directives. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #13's advanced directive consent, Out of Hospital Do Not Resuscitate (OOH-DNR) order, was signed by physician in section D.This failure could place residents at risk of receiving interventions that go against their personal preferences. Finding includedRecord review of Resident #13's face sheet, dated [DATE], reflected an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including COPD. Further review reflected advance directive Do Not Resuscitate.Record review of Resident #13's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], reflected Resident #13 had a BIMS of 15 meaning her cognition was intact. Further review of the MDS reflected she did not have a life expectancy of less than 6 months.Record review of Resident #13's care plan, initiated on [DATE], reflected…

  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 · Dcited before2026-01-15 · 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 observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and time frames to meet, attain, and/or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 2 of 8 residents (Resident #55 and Resident #72) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to address Resident #55's indwelling urinary catheter on her comprehensive resident-centered care plan. The facility failed to include measurable goals and appropriate interventions on Resident #72's comprehensive resident-centered care plan regarding weight loss. These failures could affect residents by placing them at risk of not receiving individualized care and services to meet their needs.The findings included: 1.Record review of Resident #55's electronic face sheet, dated 01/14/2026, revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with medical diagnoses of chronic kidney disease 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 Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2026-01-15 · tag F0700 — isolated
  Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to assess the resident for risk of entrapment from bed rails, review the risks and benefits of bed rails with the resident or resident representative and obtain informed consent prior to installation for 2 of 18 (Resident #3 and Resident #19) residents whose records were reviewed for the use of side rails. The facility failed to assess Resident #3 and Resident #19 for risk of entrapment from bed rails prior to installation. The facility failed to review the risks and benefits of bed rails with the resident or resident representative and obtain informed consent prior to installation of bed rails for Resident #3 and Resident #19. The facility failed to follow the manufacturers' recommendations for maintaining bed rails for Resident #3 and Resident #19.These failures could put any residents who used bed rails at risk for avoidable accidents and could cause residents or their representatives not to be aware of risks from bed rail use.Findings…

  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 before2025-11-21 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
  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 interview and record review, the facility failed to describe in the care plan the services provided due to the resident's exercise of rights and failed to describe in the care plan the resident's preference and potential for future discharge for 5 (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, Resident #5) of 7 residents reviewed for care plans.The facility failed to include the residents' preference for discharge and if their desire to return to the community had been assessed in Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, Resident #5 care plans.The facility failed to update the care plan of an advanced medical directive ordered for Resident #1. This failure could put the residents at risk of their person-centered care plan not being implemented to meet their preferences and goals which could affect their medical, physical, mental and psychosocial needs. Findings included: 1.Record review of Resident #1's electronic health record revealed a [AGE] year-old female, admission date [DATE],…

  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
• Potential for harm · E2025-05-11 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — pattern
  Timely 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 report the results of an investigation to the State Survey Agency within 5 working days of the incident for 1 (Resident #4) of 5 Residents reviewed. The Administrator failed to report the findings of an investigation concerning Resident #4 to the State Survey Agency within 5 working days of the incident. This failure could put the residents at risk of compromised protection and oversight of the state agency. Findings included: Record review of Resident #4's electronic health record revealed a [AGE] year-old female, admission date 02/01/25. Diagnoses: unspecified dementia (decline in cognitive function), senile degeneration of brain (progressive decline in cognitive abilities that occurs with aging), anxiety disorder (intense, excessive, and persistent worry and fear about everyday situations), major depressive disorder (persistent feelings of sadness, loss of interest, and other symptoms that interfere with daily life), muscle weakness. Record review…

  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 · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-05-11 · tag F0602 — failed to protect residents from theft of their belongings — isolated
  Protect each resident from the wrongful use of the resident's belongings or money.
  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 resident was free from misappropriation of all controlled drugs is maintained and periodically reconciled for 1 (Resident #3) of 7 residents reviewed for controlled substances. The facility failed to ensure LVN B conducted proper counting of the medications at shift change. The facility failed to ensure LVN B reported an identified drug discrepancy for Resident #3. This failure may put the residents at risk of drug diversion and their pharmaceutical needs not being met. Findings included: Record review of Resident #3's electronic health record revealed an [AGE] year-old female, admission date 07/03/24. Diagnoses: congestive heart failure (heart doesn't pump blood as well as it should), type 2 diabetes (adult-onset diabetes), presence of cardiac pacemaker (device provides electronic pulse to heart as needed to regulate heart rate), senile degeneration of brain (progressive decline in memory, behavior, and cognitive skills), muscle wasting 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.

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-11-21 · 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

  Based observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments for 4 of 6 (SS Cart 1, SS Cart 2, SS Cart 3 and GV Cart) medication/treatment carts reviewed for label and storage of drugs and biologicals. The facility failed to ensure medication carts SS Cart 1 and SS Cart 2 were not left unlocked, unsecured, and unattended. The facility failed to ensure treatment carts, SS Cart 3 and GV Cart were not left unlocked, unsecured, and unattended. This failure could place residents at risk of having access to unauthorized medications, wound care and medical supplies leading to possible harm or drug diversions. Findings included: During an observation on 11/16/2024 at 12:15 PM and 12:30 PM SS Cart 1 and SS Cart 2 were parked against the wall with drawers facing the hallway , both carts were unlocked and were not in line of site of a staff. A resident was observed propelling himself in his wheelchair down the hall within arms length of SS Cart 1 and SS Cart 2. On the opposite hall SS Cart 3 was parked against the wall 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.

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-11-21 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — pattern
  Safeguard 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 observations, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, that were complete and accurate for 2 (Resident #3 and Resident # 7) of 7 residents reviewed for resident records. The facility failed to ensure skin assessments were documented in medical record for Resident #3 and Resident # 7. This failure could place residents at risk of having errors in care and treatment. The Findings included: Resident #3 Record review of Resident #3's face sheet dated 11/21/2024 revealed a [AGE] year-old-male admitted on [DATE], with the following diagnosis Alzheimer's disease, heart disease, high blood pressure, and repeated falls. Record review of Resident #3's admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed; Section C- Cognitive Patterns: Resident #2 had a BIMS score of 0 (meaning severe cognitive impairment). Record review of Resident #3's care plan dated 10/25/2024 revealed Resident #2 required weekly…

  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
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-10-10 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  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

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed, in that: The facility failed to ensure: 1. All opened items in the freezer, refrigerator, and dry food storage were dated and labeled and free from expired foods. 2. The ice machine was cleaned properly. These failures could place residents at risk for food borne illness and cross-contamination. Findings included: During observation on 10/08/2024 at 10:15 AM the facility kitchen revealed: Refrigerator #1 of 2 1 container of sliced pickles, outside the original container and covered with plastic wrap, unlabeled, or dated. 1 large container labeled Ranch dated 10/7/24 with no use by date. 1 large container labeled Gravy dated 10-6 with no use by date. 1 large container labeled Gravy dated 10-07-24 with no use by date. 1 large container labeled Minestrone Soup dated 10-06 with no use by date. 1 large…

  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

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Fines & penalties

$17,128 in federal fines across 2 penalties.

• $9,110 — penalty dated 2025-05-11
• $8,018 — penalty dated 2024-01-05

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.

Who owns this facility

2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

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

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