Treasure Hills Healthcare and Rehabilitation Cente

Location & what’s nearby

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

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

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

41.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 42 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 73.1% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 26 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 0.97 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 96% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 4% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 92.3 residents a day — about 77% occupied, or roughly 28 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 3.59 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.33 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.30 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 3.00 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.83 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.42 to 0.12 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 38% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

26 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 16 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · D2026-06-10 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
  Honor 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 housekeeping and maintenance services necessary to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable interior for 1 of 6 resident rooms (Resident #2), reviewed for environment.The facility failed to ensure Resident #2's room was free of food crumbs on the bed linens and floor.This deficient practice could place residents at risk of living in an unclean and unsanitary environment which could lead to a decreased quality of life.Findings included:Record review of Resident #2's admission record, dated 6/10/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 10/13/25. Her diagnoses included cognitive communication deficit (trouble speaking, listening, or understanding others, caused by problems with thinking skills), dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), muscle weakness, need for assistance with personal care, and reduced mobility.Record review of Resident #2's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 6/1/26, reflected a BIMS score of 8…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-10 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needed respiratory care was provided with such care consistent with professional standards, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for respiratory care.The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's oxygen was administered on 6/09/2026 as ordered by the physician.This deficient practice could place residents who receive respiratory care at an increased risk of developing complications and decreased quality of care.Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's admission record, dated 6/09/26, reflected an [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 6/06/26. Her relevant diagnoses included acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (lungs suddenly stopped working properly to get oxygen into the blood, resulting in low oxygen levels throughout the body), asthma (long-term condition that caused the breathing tubes in the lungs…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-10 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
  Honor 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity, and care for each resident in a manner, and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life recognizing each resident's individuality for one (Resident #2) of three residents reviewed for facial hair.The facility failed to remove Resident #2's facial hair. This failure could affect the residents who require assistance with care from facility staff, by placing them at risk for social isolation, loss of dignity, and self-worth.Record review of Resident #2's Face Sheet, dated 12/08/2025, revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including; need for assistance with personal care, muscle weakness, lack of coordination, and reduced mobility. Record review of Resident #2's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE], revealed a BIMS score of 09 which indicated moderately impaired cognition. The Quarterly MDS assessment also…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-10 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #13) reviewed for assessments:Resident #13's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 9/29/2025, did not include a diagnosis of Displaced Unspecified Fracture of Right Great Toe. Initial Encounter for Closed Fracture.This failure could place residents at risk for inadequate care due to inadequate assessments.The findings included:Record review of Resident #13's electronic face sheet dated 12/10/2025 reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included: End Stage Renal Disease (permanent kidney damage forcing waste and fluid to build up in the body which causes tiredness, nausea, and swelling requiring dialysis), Diabetes Mellitus Type II (a condition where the body either doesn't produce enough insulin or doesn't use insulin properly, leading to high blood sugar levels), Displaced unspecified fracture of right…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-10 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial need that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #1, Resident #91) reviewed for comprehensive person-centered care plans. 1.The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's care plan included his code status. 2.The facility failed to ensure Resident #91's care plan had the correct interventions for her DNR code status. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of not being provided with the necessary care or services and not having personalized plans developed to address their specific needs. The findings included:1.Record review of Resident #1's admission record dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old male with an admit date of [DATE]. His relevant…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-10 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who needed respiratory care were 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 4 (Resident #47) residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #47's oxygen was administered at the correct setting of 3 liters per minute on 12/8/2025 as ordered by the physician. This deficient practice could place residents at an increased risk of developing respiratory complications and a decreased quality of care. The findings included: Record review of Resident #47's admission record dated 12/8/2025 reflected a [AGE] year-old male with an admission date of 09/23/2025. Pertinent diagnoses included Shortness of Breath, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (a progressive lung condition causing airflow blockage, making breathing difficult, and includes emphysema and chronic bronchitis),…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-10 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain medical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that were complete and accurately documented for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #51) reviewed for accuracy of records. The facility failed to ensure LVN D documented Resident #51's change of condition on 12/01/25.This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving appropriate care through inadequate documentation resulting in deterioration in condition, exacerbation of disease process, overmedication, and increased risk of harm or injury. The findings included:Record review of Resident #51's admission record dated 12/09/25 reflected a [AGE] year-old-female with an admit date of 08/23/23 and an initial admission date of 03/18/23. Her relevant diagnoses included congestive heart failure, lack of coordination, legal blindness, end stage renal disease, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.Record review of Resident #51's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE]…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-10 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection control program designed to prevent the development and transmission of disease and infection for 1 (Resident #100) of 3 residents reviewed for isolation precautions. Resident #100's RP did not don PPE on 12/8/2025 before entering Resident #100's room. Resident #100 was under contact isolations per physician orders. This failure could place residents who resided in the facility, as well as employees and visitors, at risk of communicable diseases.The findings included: Record review of Resident #100's face sheet dated 12/8/25 revealed a [AGE] year old male admitted to the facility on [DATE], with the diagnosis of UTI/MRSA (a dangerous type of staph bacteria resistant to common antibiotics, making UTIs harder to treat, especially in hospitalized patients or those with catheters. MRSA enters the urinary tract, causing symptoms like pain or urgency, but its resistance means standard treatments fail, requiring specific…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-08-21 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — pattern
  Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure all alleged violations including abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, are reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury, to the administrator of the facility and to other officials (which included to the State Survey Agency) in accordance with State law through established procedures for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #2, #3) reviewed for reporting alleged allegation of abuse. 1.The facility failed to report, within 2 hours, when Resident #2 and Resident #3 had a resident-to-resident altercation on 02/24/25. 2. The facility failed to report, within 24 hours, when there was a flash fire in the kitchen on…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-08-21 · tag F0644 — isolated
  Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to incorporate the recommendations from the PASRR Level II determination and the PASRR evaluation report for 1 of 12 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for PASRR. The facility failed to initiate an NFSS within 20 business days following the date the services were agreed upon in the IDT meeting for Resident #1. This failure could affect residents by placing them at risk of their specialized needs not being met. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's admission record dated 08/18/25 reflected an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. Her relevant diagnoses included, lack of coordination, unsteadiness on feet, age-related osteoporosis (increased fracture risk due to declining bone mass and strength), and seizures (uncontrolled jerking, loss of consciousness, blank stares, or other symptoms caused by abnormal electrical activity in the brain). Record review of the resident's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected, a BIMS score…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to THE ENSIGN GROUP — 342 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 10 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

6 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.

About 76% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $698K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 11% 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.

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