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

Avir at Haskell

1504 North First St, Haskell, TX 79521 · For profit - Corporation · 68 certified beds · (940) 864-8537 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (940) 864-8537 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 18 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (18) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags

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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 5 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1303 Mabee Dr · (325) 773-3800 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
100 S Avenue E · (940) 864-2673 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1202 N Avenue E · (940) 864-3763 · Call to confirm hours
Park
401 Avenue C · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1600 N 1st St · (940) 864-5557

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

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 4 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased5.8%15.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight3.9%3.0%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.3%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%0.8%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%2.4%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury11.7%3.3%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened5.1%14.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication12.0%18.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.7%3.8%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control11.0%13.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table6.0%9.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.5%1.4%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.042.171.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.512.061.80worse

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

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

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

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

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

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

11.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
0.31U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.01hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.26hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.04hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.31 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 50% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.2%CMS range 7.1–17.510.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified92.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened8.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.231.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.36
RN hours/ resident / day
1.07
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.81
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.23
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.43
RN hoursweekends
39.4%
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 68 beds and averages 32.2 residents a day — about 47% occupied, or roughly 36 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. 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 3.23 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.36 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.81 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 2.95 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.35 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.32 to 0.43 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 39% 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

6
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-07-17)
6
at the previous standard inspection (2024-06-13)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

18 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-17 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were stored properly for 1 of 2 medication carts (Medication Cart B) and 1 of 1 medication rooms, reviewed for medication storage.-The facility failed to ensure there were no expired items in the medication room.-LVN C left Medication Cart B unlocked and unattended in Hall 2. These failures could place residents at risk of receiving expired supplies and drug diversion. The findings included:During an observation of the medication room on 07/15/25 at 3:27 PM the following items were available for use by staff: Xeroform Medicated Petrolatum Dressing with an expiration date of 05/25 x 2 dressings. During an interview on 07/15/25 at 3:35 PM, the DON stated he did not know why expired items were found in the medication room. During an observation on 07/16/25 at 2:01 PM, Medication Cart B was observed sitting at the entrance to Hall 2 unlocked and unattended. During an interview on 07/16/25 at 2:03 PM, LVN C stated she had been trained to lock the medication cart when she walked…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for dietary services, in that: The facility failed on 07/15/2025 to seal and date food stored in the refrigerator and dry storage room. These failures could place residents at risk for food contamination and foodborne illness. The following observations were made on 07/15/2025 beginning at 9:29 AM during initial tour of the kitchen: Observation of the following stored in the dry storage room: Bag of powdered milk open.Container of rice with lid open.Container of elbow macaroni with lid open. Observation of the following stored in the refrigerator:Bowl of watermelon with no date.Cheese slices open with no date.Butter sticks open with no date. During an interview on 07/15/2025 at 01:30 PM with the DM, she stated all food placed in the pantry and refrigerator should be sealed and dated. She stated the bowl of watermelon had no date. She stated cheese slices and butter should be…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-17 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    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 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 3 of 6 residents (Residents #4, #5, and #16) reviewed for infection control.1. CNA B failed to wash hands with soap and water after gloves became visibly soiled when providing incontinence care for Resident #16. 2. CNA E failed to utilize proper hand hygiene between glove changes when providing incontinence care for Resident #5.3. LVN C failed to follow Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) and wear a gown when providing wound care to Resident #4.These failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination and infection. The findings include: Record review of Resident #16's face sheet, dated 07/17/25, revealed a [AGE] year-old female originally admitted to the facility 02/15/24 and readmitted to the facility…

    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 · Dcited before2025-07-17 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure each resident was treated with respect, dignity, and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promotes the maintenance or enhancement of their quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality and the facility failed to protect and promote the rights of the resident for 2 of 18 residents (Resident #5 and Resident #11) reviewed for resident rights in that:-CNA A stood next to Resident #5 while feeding him during lunch services on 07/15/25.-CNA D stood next to Resident #11 while feeding her during lunch services on 07/15/25.These failures could place residents at risk for weight-loss, diminished quality of life and loss of dignity and self-worth. The findings included: Record review of the face sheet for Resident #5, dated 07/15/25, revealed a [AGE] year-old male originally admitted to the facility 10/04/23 and readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #5 had a medical history of cerebral palsy…

    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 · D2025-07-17 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
    Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences for 1 of 18 residents (Resident #45) reviewed for call light placement. The facility failed to ensure the resident call light system was within reach for Resident #45. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the necessary assistance they need to maintain their highest level of well-being.Record review of Resident #45's face sheet dated 07/16/2025 revealed an [AGE] year-old-male admitted on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: diabetes (high blood sugar), glaucoma (eye disease), muscle spasm, cervical (neck) fracture, gastro-esophageal reflux disease (digestive disease), and hyperlipidemia (high cholesterol). Record review of Resident #45's comprehensive MDS dated [DATE] revealed the MDS was in progress. Record review of Resident #45's baseline care plan dated 07/15/2025 revealed Resident #45…

    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 · D2025-07-17 · tag F0813 — isolated
    Have a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
    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 follow their policy on personal resident refrigerators for 3 of 16 personal resident refrigerators reviewed for food safety (room [ROOM NUMBER], #28, and #31) in that the refrigerators located in room [ROOM NUMBER], #28, and #31 were not being monitored for internal temperature and expiration/used by dates. The refrigerators located in room [ROOM NUMBER], #28, and #31 were not being monitored for internal temperature and expiration/used by dates. These failures could place residents at risk for food borne illnesses. Findings include: During an observation on 07/15/2025 at 09:30 AM, Resident room [ROOM NUMBER] contained a personal refrigerator. The refrigerator contained perishable food items. The refrigerator was observed to contain a cup of juice dated 06/19/2025, an undated/unlabeled bowl of mixed fruit, an undated/unlabeled bowl of chopped onions, an undated/unlabeled bowl of a pudding-like substance, an unlabeled/undated bowl of…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-01-21 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that drugs and biologicals used in the facility were secured properly for 1 of 5 (Resident #1) residents in that: 1. LVN A failed to ensure medications for Resident #1 were secure when she left Resident #1's medications in a cup on the bedside table and walked out of the room. This failure could place residents at risk for harm and result in drug diversion due to medications not being properly secured. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #1's undated face sheet revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: Atherosclerotic Heart Disease (buildup of plaque in the arteries), Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation (rapid, irregular heartbeat that lasts a few hours or days), Hypertension (high blood pressure), Anxiety, Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease (digestive condition in which the stomach contents move up into the esophagus), Altered Mental Status (change in mental function), and Age-Related…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-06-13 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
    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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure each resident was treated with respect, dignity, and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promotes the maintenance or enhancement of their quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality and the facility failed to protect and promote the rights of the resident for 3 of 15 residents (Resident #7, Resident #17, and Resident #23) reviewed for resident rights in that: 1. The facility failed to have a privacy cover over the catheter drainage bag for Residents #7 and #17. 2. CNA B failed to provide complete privacy for Resident #7 during catheter care. 3. CNA C failed to provide complete privacy for Resident #23 during incontinence care. These failures could place residents at risk for diminished quality of life and loss of dignity and self-worth. The findings included: Resident #7: Record Review of Resident #7's face sheet, dated 06/12/24, revealed a [AGE] year-old male, who was admitted to the…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-06-13 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles and included the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions, and the expiration date when applicable and the facility failed to ensure, in accordance with State and Federal laws, all drugs and biologicals were stored in locked compartments under proper temperature controls, and permitted only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for 2 of 2 medication carts for 5 of 8 residents (Residents #3, #4, #8, #26, and #34) reviewed for medication administration. 1. LVN B failed to ensure Resident #34's medications were properly labeled as the medications were stored in an open medication cup in the medication cart top drawer. 2. LVN A failed to ensure Resident #26's medications were properly labeled as the medications were stored an in open medication cup in the medication cart. 3. LVN B failed to properly…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-06-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for dietary services. 1) The facility failed to keep freezer handles and microwave handles clean. These failures could place residents at risk for food contamination and foodborne illness. The findings included: Observation during a kitchen tour on 06/11/24 at 12:40 PM revealed 5 freezer door handles that were sticky with hard substances stuck to the inside and outside of the handle. Observation during a return visit to the kitchen on 06/13/24 at 8:46 AM revealed 1 microwave handle with several spots of hard substances stuck to the inside and outside of the handle. Interview on 06/13/24 at 10:17 AM, the DM stated all the dietary staff were responsible for kitchen cleanliness. The DM stated the night kitchen crew had a checklist to follow when closing up the kitchen and the day staff were responsible to keep up with the cleanliness throughout the day. The DM stated she was…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 8 citations
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-06-13 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    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 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 7 of 7 residents (Residents #4, #7, #10, #18, #20, #26, and #34) reviewed for infection control 1. The facility failed to ensure LVN B washed her hands or used hand sanitizer prior to medication preparation or administration for Residents #4 during medication administration. 2. CNA B failed to wash her hands prior to gathering supplies for incontinent care for Resident 7. CNA B failed to wash her hands properly before providing incontinent care for Resident 7. 3. The facility failed to ensure LVN A washed her hands or used hand sanitizer prior to medication preparation or administration for Residents #4 and #26. 3. The facility failed to ensure CNA A washed her hands properly before and after providing incontinent…

    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 · D2024-06-13 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure all residents had the right to formulate advance directives for 3 of 15 residents (Residents #12, #17, and #34) reviewed for advanced directives, in that: The facility failed to ensure Residents #12, #17, and #34, who are listed as DNR (Do Not Resuscitate), had Out-of-Hospital Do Not Resuscitate (OOH-DNR) forms that were correctly filled out and did not have missed required information on the OOH-DNR. These failures could place residents at risk for not having their end of life wishes honored and incomplete records. Findings included: Resident #12 Record review of Resident #12's undated face sheet revealed a [AGE] year-old-female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] had diagnosis which included Cerebral infarction (lack of blood supply to the brain), muscle weakness (decreased strength in muscles) and Type 2 Diabetes (problem with blood sugar). The face sheet indicated under the advance directive section - DNR-Do Not Resuscitate. Record…

    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 · D2024-06-13 · 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 interview and record review the facility failed to ensure in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, medical records maintained on each resident were accurately documented for 3 of 3 residents (Residents #3, #8 and #34) reviewed for accuracy of records. LVN A and LVN B failed to protect Residents #3, #8 and #34 information by leaving the computer screen up or halfway open with the resident's information up on the screen, while administering medications, and leaving the screen unattended. This failure could place residents at risk of having medical information exposed to others. Finding include: 1. Record review of Resident #3's, undated, face sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility 04/15/2024. Resident #3 had diagnoses which included fracture of right femur, depression, low blood pressure, rheumatoid arthritis, pain in right knew, muscle weakness, chronic kidney disease, difficulty in walking, age related cognitive decline, edema and fracture of one…

    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 · E2023-04-27 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — pattern
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    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 offer, based on a resident's comprehensive assessment, a therapeutic diet when there was a nutritional problem, and the health care provider ordered a therapeutic diet for 6 of 6 residents (Residents #1, 2, 10, 14, 20 and 28), in that: The facility failed to provide Residents #1, 2, 10, 14, 20 and 28 with their physician ordered therapeutic diets that included fortified foods, a renal diet, and/or large portions for the noon meal on 04/26/23. This failure could place residents at risk for hunger, weight loss, and chemical imbalances. The findings include: Resident #14: Record review of the face sheet for female Resident #14 dated 4/26/23 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. The resident was [AGE] years old, and had diagnoses of, acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (insufficient oxygen), muscle wasting and atrophy, not elsewhere, classified (loss of muscle tissue), hyperkalemia (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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-04-27 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 2 of 2 staff (Dietary Manager and Dietary staff A) and 1 of 1 kitchen, in that: 1) The facility failed to store, serve or process foods in a manner to prevent contamination, 2) The facility failed to handle food contact equipment in a manner to prevent contamination, 3) The facility failed to ensure food contact surfaces were clean, 4) The facility failed to perform sanitary handwashing between the handling of soiled and clean food equipment during dishwashing, 5) The facility failed to use good hygienic practices, including incorrect handwashing techniques, 6) The facility failed to ensure wiping cloth quaternary sanitizer solutions were not at required levels, 7) The facility failed to ensure food contact equipment storage areas were not maintained in a clean and sanitary manner 8) The facility failed to ensure food preparation area nonfood contact surfaces were not clean, and These failures could…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-04-27 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — pattern
    Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
    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, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, staff and the public, in 2 of 2 common resident baths (#1 and #2), 3 of 4 halls (1, 2 and 3) in that: 1)The facility failed to ensure resident rooms, resident use equipment and common areas were clean and maintained in good repair 2) The facility failed to ensure chemicals were not accessible to residents. These failures could lead to resident injuries, spread of infections, and cause the facility to have an unsightly appearance. The findings include: On 4/25/23 at 2:39 PM, an observation was made of common Bath #2. The bariatric shower chair had a buildup of residue and dirt on the mesh back. There was a soiled unlabeled cordless shaver on the toilet tank top. On 4/25/23 at 2:43 PM, an observation was made of room [ROOM NUMBER]. There were loose toilet tissue holder brackets pulling from wall. There was approximately a 3 foot section of window trim that was5…

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

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-04-27 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide 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 residents who were incontinent of bladder or had a urinary catheter received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections and to restore continence to the extent possible for 1 of 2 Residents (Resident #17) reviewed for incontinent care. - CNA A failed to maintain appropriate technique and wiped Resident #17's buttocks from back to front. This failure had the potential to affect residents by placing them at an increased risk of exposure to communicable diseases and infections. Findings include: Record review of face sheet for Resident #17, dated 04/27/23, revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: weakness, generalized anxiety disorder and constipation. Observation of incontinent care on 04/27/23 at 10:21 AM, CNA A performed incontinent care for Resident #17 and wiped the buttocks area from back to front. Interview on 04/27/23 at 10:30 AM, CNA A stated…

    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 · Dcited before2023-04-27 · 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 establish and maintain an Infection Control Program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of disease and infection for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #88) and in 1 of 2 common baths (#1) reviewed for infection control, in that: 1)The facility failed to use proper infection control precautions when providing care for Resident #88 who was COVID positive, and 2)The facility failed to ensure clean linens were stored in a sanitary manner. These failures could place residents at risk for infections. Findings include: 1)Resident #88 Record review of the face sheet for Resident #88 dated 4/25/23 revealed that the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was [AGE] years old. Resident had diagnoses of metabolic encephalopathy (chemical brain disorder), cellulitis of right lower limb (leg infection), and obesity (overweight). Record review of the current care…

    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

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

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to AVIR HEALTH GROUP — 116 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 52.3+2.7 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.4+1.6 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 51.8+1.2 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 53.6+1.4 vs chain
The other 115 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.3★, per CMS)
1 of 5Avir At BanderaBandera, TX 1 of 5Avir At Cowhorn CreekTexarkana, TX 1 of 5Avir At DallasDallas, TX 1 of 5Avir At LindaleLindale, TX 1 of 5Avir At StephenvilleStephenville, TX 1 of 5Avir at AdamsTemple, TX 1 of 5Avir at Arbor TerraceSan Angelo, TX 1 of 5Avir at BeaumontBeaumont, TX 1 of 5Avir at BeltonBelton, TX 1 of 5Avir at BoerneBoerne, TX 1 of 5Avir at BradburnGrand Saline, TX 1 of 5Avir at CaldwellCaldwell, TX 1 of 5Avir at Camp WoodCamp Wood, TX 1 of 5Avir at Citizens TrailTexarkana, TX 1 of 5Avir at ConverseConverse, TX 1 of 5Avir at GainesvilleGainesville, TX 1 of 5Avir at GarlandGarland, TX 1 of 5Avir at GiddingsGiddings, TX 1 of 5Avir at Heritage OaksLubbock, TX 1 of 5Avir at HillsboroHillsboro, TX 1 of 5Avir at HoustonHouston, TX 1 of 5Avir at Johnson CityJohnson City, TX 1 of 5Avir at KennedaleKennedale, TX 1 of 5Avir at KerrvilleKerrville, TX 1 of 5Avir at LongviewLongview, TX 1 of 5Avir at LubbockLubbock, TX 1 of 5Avir at Meadow CreekSan Angelo, TX 1 of 5Avir at MineolaMineola, TX 1 of 5Avir at New BraunfelsNew Braunfels, TX 1 of 5Avir at PatriotEl Paso, TX 1 of 5Avir at PortlandPortland, TX 1 of 5Avir at Rose TrailTyler, TX 1 of 5Avir at San AngeloSan Angelo, TX 1 of 5Avir at SeguinSeguin, TX 1 of 5Avir at TexarkanaTexarkana, TX 1 of 5Avir at Tierra EsteEl Paso, TX 1 of 5Avir at Veterans MemorialHouston, TX 1 of 5Avir at WestonTemple, TX 1 of 5Avir at WinnsboroWinnsboro, TX 1 of 5Avir at WoodlandsEastland, TX

Showing 40 of 115; lowest-rated first.

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
COUNTY OF THROCKMORTONOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 09/30/2014
GOBER, KIRBYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/30/2014
FREUND, NOCHUMIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/01/2025
TRAVITSKY, AARONIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/01/2025
DAGAN, AMITAIIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 03/03/2026
GOLDBERGER, ABRAHAMIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/02/2026
GOLDBERGER, FAIGYIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 02/02/2026
1504 N FIRST ST PROPERTY OWNER LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
WELLTOWER INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
WELLTOWER NNN GROUP, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
WELLTOWER OP LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
WELLTOWER OP, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2025
MARTINEZ IRIZARRY, AXELIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2014
MCGHEE, MAGGIEIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 06/03/2024

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.

$2.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+6.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 61%Medicare 10%Other / private 29%

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. 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

$215per resident / day
operating cost
$6,543per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$229per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in TX

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Texas Medicaid page.

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

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 675014. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-17, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next