Briarcliff Health Center Of Greenville
4400 Walnut St, Greenville, TX 75401 · Government - Hospital district · 120 certified beds · (903) 455-8729 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (22% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 3 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (38) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $40,076 in federal fines (most recent 2026-03-27)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 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 | 4 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 | 8.0% | 15.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.9% | 3.0% | 5.4% | better |
| 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 | 0.7% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 7.3% | 2.4% | 6.5% | worse 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 | 1.3% | 3.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 11.9% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 16.5% | 18.0% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.6% | 3.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 10.3% | 13.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 2.3% | 9.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.4% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 88.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 23.0% | 25.7% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 10.8% | 12.3% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.09 | 2.17 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.62 | 2.06 | 1.80 | better |
‡ 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.
49.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 238 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 66.7% 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 87 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 0.84 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 95% 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.
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 | 49.2%CMS range 43.0–54.3 | 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 | 10.3%CMS range 7.4–13.0 | 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 | 66.7% | 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 | 62.1% | 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 | 59.8% | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this 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 | 1.3% | 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 | 2.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 8.4%CMS range 5.5–12.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.26 | 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 120 beds and averages 84.2 residents a day — about 70% occupied, or roughly 36 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 0.31 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.03 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 2.99 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.55 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.29 to 0.36 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 22% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
38 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 25 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2026-03-27 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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 residents were free from significant medication errors for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for significant medication errors, in that: The facility administered the incorrect insulin on 03/12/2026 based on a failed medication reconciliation upon Resident #1's readmission resulting in a low blood glucose reading of 35. The facility should have administered Insulin Glargine (a long acting medication use to treat diabetes mellitus and help regulate blood glucose levels) 12 units daily and incorrectly administered Tresiba (an ultra-long-acting insulin). The facility failed to ensure nursing staff were able to locate the emergency kit with glucagon medication (an emergency medication to treat severe hypoglycemia or low blood glucose level) to treat Resident #1's blood glucose level of 35 until the EMS team arrived to provide emergency intervention. An IJ was identified on 03/26/2026. The IJ Template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at…
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.
- Immediate jeopardy · Kcited before2023-09-21 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident who is incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for 3 of 3 residents (Resident #43, #391, #20) reviewed for treatment of urinary tract infections and 3 of 4 residents (Resident #12, #66, and #2) reviewed for incontinent care. 1. Resident #43 was admitted to the hospital on [DATE] with septic shock related to a urinary tract infection. 2. Resident #391 was admitted to the hospital on [DATE] with a diagnosis of sepsis related to a urinary tract infection. 3. Resident #20 was admitted to the hospital on [DATE] with a diagnosis of urinary tract infection. 4. CNA M failed to clean the foley catheter tubing during foley catheter care for Resident #12 who currently had a urinary tract infection. 5. CNA P failed to provide appropriate incontinent care for Resident #66 who had a recent history of urinary tract infection. 6. The facility failed to ensure CNA V…
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.
- Immediate jeopardy · Kcited before2023-09-21 · 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 establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe and sanitary environment and to help prevent the development hospitalizations for 3 of 3 residents (Resident #'s 43, 391, and 20) reviewed for infection control practices related to hospitalized residents with urinary tract infections resulting from E coli, 3 of 6 facility staff members (CNA 's M,P, V) reviewed for infection control practices related to incontinent care and foley catheter care, the provision of antibiotic stewardship for 1 of 1 residents (Resident #191) receiving hospice services and tracking and trending of organisms causing 28 urinary tract infections in July 2023 and 19 urinary tract infections in August 2023. 1. Resident #43 was admitted to the hospital on [DATE] with septic shock related to a urinary tract infection. 2. Resident #391 was admitted to the hospital on [DATE] with a diagnosis of sepsis related to a urinary tract…
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 before2026-04-06 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
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 develop and implement written policies and procedures that prohibited and prevented abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of resident property for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to implement their abuse policy when CNA B and the ADON failed to report an allegation of abuse reported to them by Resident #2 regarding CNA A mistreating her and Resident #1 on 04/01/2026. This failure could place residents at risk of unreported abuse, neglect, exploitation, and a decreased quality of life.Findings include: Record review of the facility's Abuse Investigation and Reporting policy, revised 10/15/2022, indicated, All reports of resident abuse, neglect, exploitation, misappropriation of resident property, mistreatment and/or injuries of unknown source (abuse) shall be promptly reported to local, state and federal agencies and thoroughly investigated by facility management.…
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 · D2026-04-06 · 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 that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source were reported immediately, but no later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, if the events that caused the allegation involved abuse, for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for abuse and neglect reporting. The facility failed to ensure CNA B and the ADON reported an allegation of abuse to the Administrator immediately when Resident #2 reported to them CNA A mistreated her and Resident #1 on 04/01/2026. This failure could place residents at risk of abuse, physical harm, mental anguish, and emotional distress.Findings included: 1. Record review of a face sheet dated 04/06/2026 indicated Resident #2 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included closed fracture of the right patella (broken kneecap) and type 2 diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia (insulin…
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 before2026-04-06 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility failed to ensure CNA A performed a proper transfer, when she grabbed Resident #1 from the pants to transfer her from her wheelchair to her bed and did not use a gait belt on 04/01/2026. This failure could place residents at risk for falls, injuries, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included: Record review of a face sheet dated 04/06/2026 indicated Resident #1 was an [AGE] year-old female originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included chronic systolic congestive heart failure (heart is unable to pump enough force to push enough blood into circulation) and adult failure to thrive (a condition characterized by significant decline in physical and emotional well-being, often leading to weight loss, decreased appetite,…
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 before2026-02-11 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to develop a person-centered comprehensive care plan to address medical needs for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for comprehensive care plans.The facility failed to ensure Resident #4's comprehensive care plan was revised to reflect current transfer status of requiring a mechanical lift. This failure could place residents at increased risk of falls, injuries, and a decreased quality of life.Findings included:Record review of Resident #4's facility face sheet, dated 2/10/2026, indicated Resident #4 was a [AGE] year-old male, admitted [DATE], with diagnoses of cerebral infarction (stroke) and diabetes (increased glucose in the blood).Record review of Resident #4's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 01/29/2026, indicated Resident #4 had a BIMS of 00 indicating severely impaired cognition, was dependent on staff for assistance with all ADLs, used a wheelchair, and had functional limitation of range of motion to both upper and lower…
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 before2026-02-11 · 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 the residents' environment remains as free of accident hazards as possible for 2 of 20 residents reviewed for quality of care. (Resident # 4 and Resident # 64)The facility failed to remove worn and damaged mechanical lift slings from service for Resident's # 4 and # 64.This failure could result in a loss of quality of life due to injuries.Findings included:1. Record review of Resident # 4's face sheet, dated 2/10/2026, indicated Resident # 4 was a [AGE] year-old male, admitted [DATE], with diagnoses of cerebral infarction (stroke) and diabetes (increased glucose in the blood).Record review of Resident # 4's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 01/29/2026, indicated Resident # 4 had a BIMS of 00 indicating severely impaired cognition, was dependent on staff for assistance with all ADLs, used a wheelchair, and had functional limitation of range of motion to both upper and lower extremities.Record review of Resident # 4's comprehensive…
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 before2026-02-11 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide 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 that a resident who is incontinent of bladder receives appropriate treatment and services to prevent infections and to restore continence to the extent possible for 1 of 5 (Resident #72) residents observed for incontinent care.CNA D and CNA F did not provide proper incontinent care for Resident #72 and wiped from the anal area toward the urethral area (back to front) on 2/10/2026.This failure could place residents at risk for bacterial infections from improper incontinent care.Findings include:Record review of an admission Record for Resident #72 dated 2/10/2026 indicated she admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was [AGE] years old with diagnosis of colostomy status (surgically created opening (stoma) connecting the colon to the abdominal wall, allowing waste to bypass a damaged or diseased part of the bowel), anorexia nervosa (an eating disorder that involves severe calorie restriction low body weight), and hypertension (high…
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 before2026-02-11 · 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 ensure accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing and administering of medications for 2 of 6 residents (Residents # 27 and # 62) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to remove Resident # 27's expired lorazepam concentrate (anxiety medication) from the medication room refrigerator.The facility failed to remove Resident #62's expired ondansetron (nausea medication) from the medication cart.These failures could place residents who receive medications at risk of not receiving the intended therapeutic benefit of the medications, decreased quality of life, and hospitalization.Findings included:1. Record review of Resident #27's face sheet revealed Resident #27 was an [AGE] year-old female that admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of polyneuropathies (damage to multiple peripheral nerves).Record review of Resident #27's comprehensive care plan dated 2/20/2025 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 · Dcited before2026-02-11 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure drugs and biological's used in the facility were labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles and the expiration date when applicable for 1 of 4 medication carts (A hall nurse medication cart) reviewed for labeling and storage, in that:The facility failed to label over the counter (OTC) eye drops with the name of the specific resident it was ordered for on [DATE].This failure could place residents who receive medications to have adverse reactions or cross contamination.Findings included:During an observation on [DATE] at 11:30 am, the medication cart for hall A had an OTC bottle of Sodium Chloride Hypertonicity ophthalmic solution 5% that was opened and unlabeled.During an interview on [DATE] at 11:40 am, LVN E said she was not sure what resident the eye drops belonged to. She said the nurses were responsible for labeling the OTC eyes drops with the residents name and date opened to ensure they were not used on 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 before2026-02-11 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #72) reviewed for infection control.The facility failed to ensure CNA D and CNA F followed contact precautions when incontinent care was provided to Resident #72 on 2/10/2026.These failures could place residents at risk of exposure to infectious diseases due to improper infection control practices.Findings included:Record review of an admission Record for Resident #72 dated 2/10/2026 indicated she admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was [AGE] years old with diagnosis of colostomy status (surgically created opening (stoma) connecting the colon to the abdominal wall, allowing waste to bypass a damaged or diseased part of the bowel), anorexia nervosa (an eating disorder that involves…
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 · D2025-11-21 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard 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 interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that are complete and accurately documented for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 resident reviewed for resident records.The facility failed to reflect that Resident # 1 presented with alterations in skin integrity on daily Skilled Evaluation forms. This failure placed residents at risk of having inaccurate assessments to include those with alterations in skin integrity, that could lead to residents not receiving care as needed due to inaccurate medical records.The findings included: Record review of Resident # 1's EMR and face sheet dated 10/08/2025 reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 09/05/2025. Her diagnoses included: Right femur (thigh bone) fracture, sacral region (area of the back and buttock) pressure ulcer, right buttock pressure ulcer, left buttock deep tissue injury, MRSA (Methicillin Resistant…
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 25 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-21 · 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 interview, and record review the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 3 (Resident #1) resident reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to immediately implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for Resident #1 when she admitted on [DATE]. These deficient practices placed residents at risk for cross contamination and spread of infection.Findings included:Record review of Resident # 1's EMR and face sheet dated 10/08/2025 reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 09/05/2025. Her diagnoses included: Right femur (thigh bone) fracture, sacral region (area of the back and buttocks) pressure ulcer, right buttock pressure ulcer, left buttock deep tissue injury, MRSA (Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus, a type of bacteria that is…
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 · D2025-07-28 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — isolatedMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program so that the facility was free of pests and rodents for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pest control.The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's room remained free from ants. Resident #1 had ants in her bed on 07/27/25.This failure could place residents at risk of injury or infection related to ant bites, unsanitary environment, and decreased quality of life. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1’s face sheet, dated 7/28/25, indicated a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included lack of coordination, abnormal posture, abnormalities of gait and mobility. Record review of Resident #1’s admission MDS, dated [DATE], indicated she was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 14. Resident #1 was dependent on staff for transfers. She required substantial to maximal assist with bed mobility with the helper doing more than half 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 before2024-11-20 · 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 interviews and record reviews the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 4 of 24 residents (Residents #90, Resident #95, Resident #203, Resident #98) reviewed for care plans. 1.The facility failed to include Resident #90's diagnosis and interventions for the medication Eliquis Oral Tablet 2.5 MG (Apixaban) (an anticoagulant used for preventing coagulation of blood) in his comprehensive care plan. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #95's diagnosis of Clostridioides difficile also known as C-diff (a very contagious bacterium that can cause diarrhea and colitis) and precautions was on her care plan. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #98's Eliquis (a medication used to reduce the risk of stroke and blood clots), and interventions was on his care plan. 4. 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 before2024-11-20 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that the comprehensive care plans were reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment, for 3 residents (Resident #90, Resident #203, and Resident #8) out of 24 sampled residents whose care plans were reviewed for timing and revision. The facility failed to ensure Resident #90's care plan was updated and accurate by not resolving the care plan for a PICC line and antibiotic administration that resident no longer had an order for. The facility failed to ensure Resident #203's care plan was updated by resolving her melatonin and rash in which she no longer had those orders. The facility failed to ensure Resident #8's care plan was updated by resolving her antibiotics and IV fluids in which she no longer had those orders. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving the care and services to meet their needs. Findings include: 1.Record review of Resident #90's face sheet indicated he was a [AGE] year-old…
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 before2024-11-20 · 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 establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections reviewed for 7 of 24 residents (Resident's#95, #203, #64, #20, #21, #74, #98) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA F, LVN C, and therapist E were following contact isolation for Resident #95 who had Clostridium difficile, also known as C-diff (a very contagious bacterium that can cause diarrhea and colitis). 2. The facility failed to ensure the treatment nurse performed hand hygiene while performing wound care, and CNA B was following Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for Resident #203 who had wounds. 3. The facility failed to ensure CNA D changed gloves or performed hand hygiene while providing incontinent care for Resident #64. 4. The facility failed to ensure CMA S used proper…
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 · D2024-11-20 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and provide care in a manner that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 2 of 24 residents (Resident #20 and Resident #74) reviewed for resident rights. The facility did not ensure Laundry Aide N knocked, introduced herself, and explained what she was doing prior to entering Resident #20's and Resident #74's room. This failure could place residents at risk for diminished quality of life, loss of dignity and loss of self-worth. Findings included: 1.Record review of the face sheet, dated 11/18/2024, revealed Resident #20 was a [AGE] year old female with diagnoses which included type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy (diabetic neuropathy was a common and serious complication of type 2 diabetes that occurs when high blood sugar damages nerves over time), acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (a medical emergency where the lungs are unable to adequately…
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 · D2024-11-20 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences for 1 of 24 residents (Resident #65) reviewed for accommodation of needs. The facility treatment nurse failed to ensure Resident #65's call light was in reach for her to use when assistance was needed on 11/17/24-11/19/24. This failure could have placed resident at risk of having needs gone unmet. Findings Included: Record review or Resident #65's face sheet dated 11/25/24 indicated she was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnoses Alzheimer's (a progressive disease that destroys memory and other mental functions), high blood pressure, history of falling, and anxiety (a mental health characterized by worry, anxiety, or fear). Record review of Resident #65's MDS dated [DATE] indicated she could usually understand others and usually made herself…
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 before2024-11-20 · 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 ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, personal and oral hygiene for 1 of 24 residents (Resident #59) reviewed for ADL (activities of daily living) care. The facility failed to provide nail care by removing black material from under fingernails for dependent female Resident #59 on 11/17/2024,11/18/2024, and 11/19/2024. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving care and services to meet their needs. Findings included: Record review of the face sheet, dated 11/18/2024, revealed Resident #59 was a [AGE] year old female with diagnoses which included traumatic subdural hemorrhage without loss of consciousness, subsequent encounter (a medical situation where a patient has experienced a brain bleed (subdural hemorrhage) due to a head injury, but did not lose consciousness at the time of the injury, and was now being seen for…
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 before2024-11-20 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible for 1 of 24 Residents (Resident #98) reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility failed to ensure Resident #98's fall mat was beside his bed on 11/17/24, 11/18/24 and 11/19/24. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of harm or injury and contribute to avoidable accidents. Findings included: 1.Record review of Resident #98's face sheet, dated 11/20/24 indicated he was an [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included muscle weakness, dementia (loss of memory), atrial fibrillation (a common type of irregular heartbeat), and high blood pressure. Record review of Resident 98's 5-day MDS assessment, dated 10/22/24, indicated Resident #98 understood and was understood by others. Resident #98's BIMS score was a 03 indicating his cognition was severely impaired. The MDS indicated Resident #98 required…
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 before2024-11-20 · 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 needed respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences for 1 of 3 residents (Resident's #205) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to date and follow the physician's order to change oxygen tubing weekly on Saturday nights for Resident #205. This failure could place residents who receive respiratory care at risk of developing respiratory complications and a decreased quality of care. Finding included: Record review of Resident #205's face sheet, dated 11/20/24 indicated an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of congestive heart failure also known as CHF (a chronic condition that occurs when the heart can't pump enough blood to meet the body's needs), Atrial fibrillation also known as AFib (is a heart…
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 before2024-11-20 · 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 store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments under proper temperature controls and permit only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for 1 medication cart (Hall 100 medication cart) of 5 medication carts. The facility failed to ensure LVN R the 100 Hall medication cart was locked when it was left unattended in the hallway with the door closed while he provided a treatment for a resident. This failure could place residents at risk for overdose or injury from sharp needles. Findings included: During an observation on 11/18/24 at 09:56 AM, LVN R left the treatment cart unlocked and unattended on the A hall with door closed while he provided a wound treatment to a resident who resided on A hall. During an observation and interview on 11/18/24 at 10:03 AM, LVN R walked out of the resident's room and locked the treatment cart that was left open and unattended. He said he was responsible for locking the cart, but he forgot to lock the cart because he got distracted. LVN R said he normally would have…
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 before2024-11-20 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food safety in the facility's only kitchen reviewed for food and nutrition services. 1. The facility failed to ensure hair restraints were worn appropriately by dietary staff. 2. The facility failed to ensure the interior of the microwave was free of brown debris. These failures could place residents at risk for foodborne illness. Findings include: An observation in the kitchen on 11/17/2024 at 10:20 a.m., revealed [NAME] L was not wearing a hair restraint appropriately while preparing the lunch meal. [NAME] L hair was visible outside of the hairnet in the back approximately four inches. An observation in the kitchen on 11/17/2024 at 10:28 a.m., revealed dietary [NAME] M was not wearing a hair restraint while in the kitchen washing dishes. An observation in the kitchen on 11/17/2024 at 10:45 a.m., revealed the interior of the microwave was covered with a brown debris. During an interview on 11/18/2024 at 10:00 a.m.,…
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 before2024-04-23 · 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
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 3 staff (Treatment Nurse) viewed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure the Treatment Nurse performed changed gloves and performed hand hygiene after moving a dirty napkin from the bedside table, picking oxygen tubing up out of the floor, and before starting wound care. These failures could place residents and staff at risk for cross-contamination, spread of infection and could potentially affect all others in the building. Findings Include: During an observation on 4/23/24 at 8:51 a.m. the Treatment Nurse grabbed a dirty napkin off the bedside table and threw it away in the Resident #1's trash, then picked up the Resident #1's oxygen tubing out of the floor. The Treatment Nurse did not change his gloves or perform hand hygiene prior to starting wound care after picking up 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 · Fcited before2023-09-21 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food safety in the facility's only kitchen. The facility failed to ensure: *food items were dated and sealed appropriately. *expired food items were discarded. *a dented can was stored separately. *the can opener was clean. *the pantry was clean. *Hydrion test strips (test strips used to measure the concentration of chemicals in sanitizing solution) were not expired. *the dishwasher reached 120 F. These failures could place residents at risk for foodborne illness. Findings included: During an observation of the kitchen on 09/18/2023, starting at 10:12 AM, accompanied by the Dietary Manager the following observations were made: Reach in refrigerator: *Multiple half sandwiches in plasic bags with no date *Multiple cups of apple juice, cranberry, and orange juice with no date *A container filled with puddings, protein shakes, gelatin had crumbs and 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 · E2023-09-21 · tag F0576 — patternEnsure residents have reasonable access to and privacy in their use of communication methods.
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 residents had the right to send and receive mail, and to receive letters, packages, and other materials delivered to the facility for the resident through the means other than a postal service for 8 of 8 confidential residents reviewed for weekend mail delivery. The facility failed to ensure residents received their mail on the weekend. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving mail in a timely manner that could result in a decline in resident's psychosocial well-being and quality of life. Findings included: During a confidential group interview 8 of 8 residents stated mail was not distributed on Saturdays. They stated mail did not get delivered until Monday or even picked up until Monday. The residents stated the little mailbox inside the facility even had a note on it to that effect. During a telephone interview on 9/19/2023 at 1:56 p.m., the Postmaster stated mail was not delivered to this facility on Saturdays. The supervisor for the mail carriers indicated the business was considered closed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-09-21 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to implement written policies and procedures to prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation for 5 of 22 employees (DON, ADON, Dietician, Social Worker and Housekeeping Supervisor) reviewed for freedom from abuse, neglect, and exploitation . The facility failed to ensure the Human Resource (HR) Coordinator completed an Employee Misconduct Registry (EMR) check annually for the for the DON, ADON, Dietician, Social Worker. This failure could place residents at risk for abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of property. Findings included: Record review of the facility's Abuse/Neglect policy revised on 9/2014, indicated, the facility, will do all that can reasonably be done to prohibit, report and prevent abuse, neglect, exploitation and involuntary seclusion of residents through the implementation of this policy. This policy consists of several components. The Facility Abuse and neglect policy did not mention annual checks of the State nursing registry. Procedure I. Screening of potential employees. A. 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 · E2023-09-21 · tag F0700 — patternTry 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assess the residents for risk of entrapment from bed rails prior to installation, 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 3 of 3 residents (Resident #78, Resident #36, Resident #2) reviewed for bed rails. The facility failed to ensure Resident #78, Resident #36, and Resident #2 had assessments or informed consents for the use of bed rails. This failure could place the residents at risk for entrapment, injury, or harm. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #78's face sheet dated 09/20/23, indicated an [AGE] year-old female who initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #78's diagnoses included periprosthetic fracture (fracture and breaks of the bone around a total knee replacement) around internal prosthetic right knee joint, transient cerebral ischemic attack (mini stroke),…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-21 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
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 each resident was informed before, or at the time of admission, and periodically during the residents stay, of services available in the facility and of changes for those services, which included changes for services not covered under Medicare/Medicaid or by the facility's per diem rate for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #190) reviewed for Medicare/Medicaid coverage. The facility failed to ensure Resident #190 was given a SNF ABN when discharged from skilled services at the facility prior to covered days being exhausted. This failure could place residents at risk for not being aware of changes to provided services. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #190's face sheet, dated 09/21/2023, indicated Resident #190 was a [AGE] year-old male, admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included encephalopathy (brain disease that alters brain function or structure), and type 2 diabetes mellitus (chronic condition that affects the way…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-21 · 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 provide a safe, clean, sanitary, comfortable, and homelike environment for 1 of 1 of 21 (Resident #29) resident reviewed for environment. The facility failed to replace Resident #29's over the bed light bulb when burned out. The facility failed to ensure Resident #29's light cover was covering the fluorescent light bulbs in the over the bed lighting. These failures could potenially cause a skin injury. Findings included: Record review of Resident #29's face sheet dated 9/21/2023 indicated Resident #29 was an [AGE] year-old female who originally admitted on [DATE], and then readmitted on [DATE] with the diagnosis of heart failure, heart attack, and low blood pressure. Record review of an annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] Resident #29 was usually understood by others and usually understood others. The MDS indicated Resident #29's vision was severely impaired. The MDS indicated Resident #29's BIMS score was a 3 indicating a severe cognitive…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-21 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 assessments accurately reflected the resident status for 3 of 21 residents (Resident #49, Resident #84, and Resident #61) reviewed for MDS assessment accuracy. 1. The facility inaccurately coded Resident #49 having a foley catheter on his admission MDS assessment. 2. The facility did not ensure Resident #84's admission MDS identified a medication as an anti-platelet instead of an anticoagulant. 3.The facility did not acccurately code Resident #61 receiving hospice services on her admission MDS assessment. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving care and services to meet their needs. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #49's face sheet dated 09/21/23, indicated he was an [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #49's diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (chronic inflammatory lung disease that causes obstructed airflow from the lungs), emphysema (lung…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-21 · 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 observations, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 2 of 21 residents (Resident #49 and Resident #36) reviewed for comprehensive person-centered care plans. 1. The facility failed to develop a care plan for Resident # 49's urostomy (surgical procedure that creates a stoma (artificial opening) for the urinary system). 2. The facility failed to care plan Resident #36's side rails. These failures could place residents at risk for unmet care needs and decreased quality of care. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #49's face sheet dated 09/21/23, indicated he was an [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #49's diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-21 · 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 ensure necessary services to maintain grooming and personal hygiene were provided for 1 of 21 residents (Resident #32) reviewed for ADLs. 1. The facility failed to provide assistance with facial hair removal for Resident #32. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #32 received her shower as scheduled. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving services and care, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included: Record review of Resident #32's face sheet dated 09/20/23, indicated a [AGE] year-old female who initially admitted to the facility 03/27/23 and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #32's diagnoses included metabolic encephalopathy (problem in the brain caused by a chemical imbalance in the blood), Parkinson's disease (a disorder of the central nervous system that affects movement, often including tremors), depression (persistently depressed mood) and orthostatic hypotension (a form of low blood pressure that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-21 · 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 residents requiring respiratory care were provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practices for 1 of 87 residents (Resident #73) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #73's oxygen was administered at 2.5 liters per minute via nasal cannula as prescribed by the physician. This failure could place residents who receive respiratory care at risk for developing respiratory complications. The findings included: Record review of the order summary report, dated 03/01/23, revealed Resident #73 had a physician's order, which started on 02/06/23, for Oxygen at 2.5 liters per minute via nasal cannula continuous. Record review of the face sheet, dated 09/20/23, revealed Resident #73 was a [AGE] year-old female who initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; an inflammatory lung disease that causes obstructed airflow from 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 · Dcited before2023-09-21 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services, including procedures that assure the accurate dispensing and administering of all drugs and biologicals to meet the needs of each resident for 1 (Resident #84) of 21 residents reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility did not ensure Resident #84 amlodipine (blood pressure medication) and lisinopril (blood pressure medication) was held when her blood pressure was outside of parameters. This failure could place the resident at risk of low blood pressure, dizziness, or fall. Findings include: Record review of Resident #84's face sheet, dated 09/21/2023, indicated Resident #84 was an [AGE] year-old female, readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included essential hypertension (high blood pressure). Record review of Resident #84's order summary report, dated 09/21/2023, indicated Resident #84 was prescribed amlodipine besylate 10mg, 1 tablet by mouth one time a day related to essential hypertension,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-21 · tag F0849 — isolatedArrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
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 collaborate with hospice representatives and coordinate the hospice care planning process for each resident receiving hospice services, to ensure quality of care for the resident, ensuring communication with the hospice medical director, the resident's attending physician, and others participating in the provision of care for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #61) reviewed for hospice services. The facility did not ensure Resident #61's hospice records were a part of their records in the facility. This failure could place residents who receive hospice services at-risk of receiving inadequate end-of-life care due to a lack of documentation, coordination of care, and communication of resident needs. Findings included: Record review of Resident #61's face sheet, dated 09/21/2023, indicated Resident #61 was an [AGE] year-old female, readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Alzheimer's (progressive disease that destroys memory and other…
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
$40,076 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $14,901 — penalty dated 2026-03-27
- $25,175 — penalty dated 2023-09-21
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
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| STEPHENS MEMORIAL HOSPITAL DISTRICT | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 12/01/2023 |
| BAUDER FAMILY INVESTMENTS, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| BOULWARE ST JAMES LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| BAUDER, KELLY | Individual | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| BAUDER, MADISON | Individual | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| BOULWARE, DOUGLAS | Individual | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| BOULWARE, SANDRA | Individual | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| BOULWARE, STEVEN | Individual | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| BOULWARE, THOMAS | Individual | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| WALKER, KATIE | Individual | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| BAUDER, PARKER | Individual | 5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| EASLEY, JAMES | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 12/02/2024 |
| PMG OPCO - GREENVILLE LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| BAUDER, WILLIAM | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| MOORE, ROBIN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| BRIDGEPOINTE FINANICAL SERVICES, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| INNOVATIVE NURSE CONSULTING, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| PRIORITY MANAGEMENT GROUP, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| PROGRESSIVE REHAB SOLUTIONS, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| STEVEN BOULWARE FAMILY INVESTMENTS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| SELVAGGI, RICHARD | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 34 rows in the source record cover these 21 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
9 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.
This home reported $822K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 10% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. 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
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 675666. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-02-11, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.