Caraday of Houston
6534 Stuebner Airline Road, Houston, TX 77091 · For profit - Corporation · 150 certified beds · (713) 692-5137 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Mar 2025
- inspectors cited 3 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
- 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
- the CMS record shows $53,518 in federal fines (most recent 2026-05-29)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 12.5% | 15.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 1.2% | 3.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 2.4% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.6% | 3.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 16.9% | 14.0% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 16.5% | 18.0% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.9% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.0% | 3.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 12.3% | 13.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 13.7% | 9.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 48.6% | 88.0% | 79.4% | worse |
* 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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.66 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 90% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not 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 SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not 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 discharge | not 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 discharge | not 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 identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not 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 stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not 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 SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 150 beds and averages 42.4 residents a day — about 28% occupied, or roughly 108 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 3.79 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.43 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.35 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 3.60 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.87 on weekdays — 7% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.41 to 0.48 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
1 administrator has left in the past year.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
18 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2026-05-29 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents environment remained free of accident hazards as is possible to ensure residents receiving adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #46) reviewed for accidents and supervision.The facility failed to provide appropriate and sufficient supervision to prevent avoidable accidents when Resident #46, despite her recent history of falls and documented fall risk, was left unattended and had an unwitnessed fall. The fall resulted in fracture to Resident #46's cervical spine requiring hospitalization and surgery from 05/07/26 to 05/18/26.The facility further failed to mitigate the risk for falls and accidents when they failed to revise her care plan with post-surgical instructions upon her re-admission to the facility.An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation was identified on 05/28/2026. While the IJ was removed on 05/29/2026, the facility remained out of compliance at a scope of isolated with 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2026-05-14 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to immediately consult with the resident's physician; and notify, consistent with his or her authority, the resident representative(s) when there was a significant change in the resident's physical, mental, or psychosocial status (that is, a deterioration in health, mental, or psychosocial status in either life-threatening conditions or clinical complications) for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 residents reviewed for resident rights.- Nurse A did not respond to the Dr.'s text message on 05/01/26 at 10:12 p.m. when she asked him if it looked like Resident #1 had a stroke.-Nurse B failed to report Resident #1's change in condition for approximately 12 hours and 36 minutes beginning on 05/01/26 around 10:12 p.m. NP was notified on 05/02/26 at about 10:48 a.m. and Resident #1 was not transported to the hospital until 05/02/26 at approximately 11:42 a.m.An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified on 05/09/26. The IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 1:30…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2026-05-14 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
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 residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 residents reviewed for quality of care.-Nurse A noticed a change in Resident #1's speech on 05/01/26 around 9:30 p.m. He sent a text message to the Dr. at 9:37 p.m. and at 10:12 p.m., the Dr. asked if it looked like resident had a stroke, but Nurse A did not follow up with the Dr. The Dr. did not follow up with Nurse A.-Nurse B failed to report Resident #1's change in condition for approximately 12 hours and 36 minutes beginning on 05/01/26 around 10:12 p.m.-It took Resident #1 a total of 13 hours and 30 minutes to receive care for a possible stroke. Nurse A noticed a change in condition on 05/01/26 around 9:30 p.m. and Resident #1 was transferred to the hospital by EMS on 05/02/26 around 11:42 a.m.An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified on 05/09/26. The IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 1:30 p.m. While…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-05-29 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview, and record review the facility failed to designate a registered nurse to serve as the director of nursing on a full-time basis at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week for 2 of 60 (05/18/2026 and 05/25/2026) days reviewed.The facility failed to provide RN coverage for 05/18/2026 and 05/25/2026 to meet the requirements of an RN working a full 8 hours a day.These failures could result in periods without required RN oversight and placed residents at risk for unmet care needs, delayed assessments, and inadequate supervision of licenses and unlicensed staff. Findings include:Record review of the facilities PBJ data for fiscal year 1 2026 revealed the results as 'Not Triggered' for no RN hours.Record review of the facilities RN Coverage Timesheets revealed no RN worked for 05/18/2026 and 05/25/2026.During an interview on 05/28/2026 at 3:44pm with the Administrator she stated the facility has been without a DON for approximately 30 days. She stated that when a DON was not present, the facility typically assigned other RNs to cover DON responsibilities; however,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-29 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan that included services that were to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #46) reviewed for care plans.The facility failed to review and revise Resident #46 care plan despite her history of four recent falls (2/1/26, 2/15/26, 2/23/26, and 3/10/26) before she had a major fall on 05/07/26 and when she was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a neck fracture and with post-surgical needs.This deficient practice could place residents at risk of harm as qualified staff responsible for carrying out interventions were not notified of their roles and responsibilities of the specific are and services implemented for the resident.Findings include: Record review of Resident #46 face sheet indicated she is [AGE] year-old female. Her admitting date is recorded as 7/23/21 and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-29 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not maintain an infection prevention program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #7) reviewed for infection control.- CNA X failed to change gloves, wash, or sanitize hands after cleaning Resident #7's buttocks, and before handling the clean brief and bed linens.CNA Y failed to change gloves, wash, or sanitize hands after cleaning Resident #7's peri-area during incontinent care and before handling the clean brief, bed linens, and touching Resident #7's face.These failures could place residents who required assistance with toileting needs at risk for cross contamination and infection.Record review of Resident # 7's face sheet revealed a [AGE] year-old admitted to the facility on [DATE], initially admitted on [DATE] and originally admitted on [DATE]. Resident #7's diagnoses included Quadriplegia…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-11-21 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — patternHonor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
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 promote and facilitate resident self- determination through support of resident choice for 1 of 6 residents (CR#1) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure that CR#1had the opportunity to exercise rights regarding those things that were important in their life. The facility failed to promote self-determination by not having hot water in the facility, which prevented each from taking showers. This failure could place residents at risk of decreased self-worth due to their preferences not being met.The findings include: Record Review of CR#1's face sheet revealed a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 10/21/25 with diagnoses of Cerebral Infarction (Stroke), COPD (lung disease), Viral Hepatitis C (Liver Damage), and Type 2 Diabetes (Increase sugar levels). Record Review of CR#1's MDS Quarterly dated 9/19/25 revealed a BIMS score of 15 (which means CR#1 had normal cognitive functioning). CR#1…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-28 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident had the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 and Resident #2 were not involved in a resident-to-resident altercation on 04/07/2024. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of physical injury and/or psychosocial harm. The findings were: 1. Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 03/28/2025, revealed a male resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included: Nontraumatic Intracerebral Hemorrhage, Intraventricular (A type of stroke where bleeding occurs in the [NAME] tissue and also spills into the ventricles, the fluid filled spaces in the brain), Aphasia, Compression of Brain (A condition where increased pressure within the skull), Cerebral Edema (Swelling of the brain tissue due to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-28 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to 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 1 of 3 medication carts reviewed for medication storage. The facility failed to ensure medications were properly stored and labled when Resident #4's medications were popped into a pull cup and left unattended. This failure could place residents at risk for drug diversion, lack of drug efficacy, and adverse reactions. Findings include: During an observation on 3/27/25 at 9:32am revealed a medication aide cart with a medication cup labeled Resident #4 (name) with at least 7 pills inside. During an interview on 3/27/25 at 9:37am CMA E stated the resident was taking a shower, and she would have to go back to give her medications. During an interview on 3/27/25 at 10:55am LVN A stated you should never leave any open pills on the cart. You never know what could happen to those pills during that time.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-28 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — isolatedMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program so the facility was free of pest and rodents for 2 of 2 residents reviewed for environment. The facility failed to ensure resident rooms were free of gnats. This failure could place residents at risk of infection, skin irritation, allergies, which could result in unsanitary living conditions and decline in health and well-being. Findings include: In an observation with Resident #404, on 03/26/2025 at 9:57am revealed sightings of gnats on the walls, on pictures, lighting above Resident #404 bed, flying around And on a urinal placed on the floor. In an interview with Resident #404 on 03/26/2025 at 9:57 AM, the resident stated the gnats were horrible and there was a substance that was placed by MAINT, but it wasn't catching the gnats. In an interview with HSK on 03/26/2025 at 10:11 AM, revealed the resident room always had gnats. HSK stated they did not know why there were so many gnats in the room…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-12-14 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespreadHave a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to use the service of a Registered Nurse (RN) for at least eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week in the facility for 36 of 92 days (09/11/2023, 09/12/2023, 09/13/2023, 09/14/2023, 09/15/2023, 09/17/2023, 09/18/2023, 09/19/2023, 09/20/2023, 09/21/2023, 09/22/2023, 09/23/2023, 09/25/2023, 09/26/2023, 09/27/2023, 09/28/2023, 09/29/2023, 09/30/2023, 10/02/2023, 10/03/2023, 10/04/2023, 10/05/2023, 10/06/2023, 10/07/2023, 10/08/2023, 10/09/2023, 10/10/2023, 10/11/2023, 10/12/2023, 10/13/2023, 11/02/2023, 12/05/2023, 12/06/2023, 12/07/2023, 12/08/2023, and 12/11/2023) reviewed during a look back period from 09/11/2023 to 12/11/2023. -The facility failed to have RN coverage in the facility for eight consecutive hours on 09/11/2023, 09/12/2023, 09/13/2023, 09/14/2023, 09/15/2023, 09/17/2023, 09/18/2023, 09/19/2023, 09/20/2023, 09/21/2023, 09/22/2023, 09/23/2023, 09/25/2023, 09/26/2023, 09/27/2023, 09/28/2023, 09/29/2023, 09/30/2023, 10/02/2023, 10/03/2023, 10/04/2023, 10/05/2023, 10/06/2023, 10/07/2023, 10/08/2023,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-12-14 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, comfortable, and homelike environment for one of twelve residents (Resident #2) reviewed for a safe, clean, and homelike environment. -The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 had a working light in her room above her sink. -The facility failed to ensure the residents who smoked cigarettes had a safe, comfortable seating area available as the bench in the smoking area was broken. These failures could place the residents at risk of injury from the visible nails on the bench in the smoking area and could place the residents at risk of decreased quality of like due to the lack of a well-maintained environment. Findings include: Record review of Resident #2's admission record dated 12/12/023 revealed a [AGE] year-old woman admitted on [DATE]. The admission record documented her diagnoses included dementia (group of symptoms that affects memory, thinking and interferes with daily life), unspecified…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-12-14 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure that drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for 1 of 1 medication aide cart, 1 of 1 medication room refrigerator, and 1 of 1 nurse's carts reviewed for medications. -1 of 1 medication aide cart had two opened undated eye drops and two discontinued medications. -1 of 1 medication rooms had a water bottle(Ozarka) 700ml sport cover in the freezer section of the refrigerator. -1 of 1 nurse's medication cart had opened and undated medications. These failures could affect residents, placing them at risk for altered effectiveness of the medication and worsening of the resident's symptoms, requiring medical intervention. The findings include: During an observation on 12/13/23 at 2:20 p.m., it revealed the medication aide cart had two eye drop containers that were opened and not dated: Latanoprost sol 0.005% and Combigan sol 0.2/0.5%. During an interview on 12/13/23…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 5 citations
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-14 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who needed respiratory care were provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 (Resident #290,) of 3 resident reviewed for respiratory care. -The facility administered oxygen to Resident #290 without a physician order. These failures placed residents who received oxygen therapy at risk of respiratory complications. Findings include: Record review of Resident #290's admission face sheet dated 10/19/23 revealed an [AGE] year-old female who was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted [DATE]. Her diagnoses included diabetes mellitus (metabolic disease involving Hight blood glucose levels), hypertension (blood is pumping with more force than normal through arteries), dementia (impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions that interferes with doing everyday activity) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (lung disease causing restricted airflow and breathing…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-14 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure that drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for 1 of 1 medication aide cart and 1 of 1 medication room refrigerator reviewed for medications. -1 of 1 medication aide cart had two discontinued medications. -1 of 1 medication rooms had a water bottle (Ozarka) 700 ml sport cover in the freezer section of the refrigerator. These failures could affect residents, placing them at risk for altered effectiveness of the medication and worsening of the resident's symptoms, requiring medical intervention. The findings include: During an observation on 12/13/23 at 2:35 p.m., revealed the medication aide's cart had two discontinued medications: Clopidogrel 75 mg and Metoprolol [NAME] 25mg were left in the cart. During an interview on 12/13/23 at 2:35 p.m., MA T said the doctor discontinued medications because the resident brought them from home, and it was replaced with the medicines…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-14 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolatedEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
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 act upon the recommendations of the pharmacist report of irregularities for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #2), reviewed for the Medication Regimen Review (MRR). -The facility failed to review and act on the pharmacist's Resident #2's to utilize the correct consent form. This failure could place residents at risk from maintaining their highest practicable level of physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being, and could place them at risk for not providing informed consent to a psychotropic medication. The findings include: Record review of Resident #2's admission record dated 12/12/023 revealed a [AGE] year-old woman admitted on [DATE]. The admission record documented her diagnoses included dementia (group of symptoms that affects memory, thinking and interferes with daily life), unspecified psychosis (diagnosis assigned to individuals who are experiencing symptoms of schizophrenia or other psychotic symptoms, but do not meet the full diagnostic…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-14 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
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 the medication error rate was not five percent or greater. The facility had a medication error rate of 7 % based on 2 errors out of 27 opportunities, which involved 1 of 11 residents (Resident #31) reviewed for medication errors. - MA B was going to administer Metoprolol and Lisinopril (used to treat high blood pressure) and not follow the blood pressure parameters according to the physician's orders for Resident #31. This failure could place residents at risk for increased negative side effects and a decline in health. Findings include: Record review of Resident #31's Face Sheet dated 12/14/23 revealed, a [AGE] year-old female was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included: hypertension (condition in which the blood vessels have persistently raised pressure), major depressive disorder (medial illness that negatively affect how you feel, the way you think and how you act), and chronic…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-14 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were free from any significant medication errors for 1 of 11 residents (Residents #31) reviewed for significant medication errors. - MA B failed to administer medications as ordered by the physician to Resident # 31. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving the desired therapeutic effect of their medications and negative outcomes. Findings include: Record review of Resident #31's Face Sheet dated 12/14/23 revealed, a [AGE] year-old female was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included: hypertension (condition in which the blood vessels have persistently raised pressure), major depressive disorder (medial illness that negatively affect how you feel, the way you think and how you act), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (group of disease that cause airflow blockage and breathing related problem). Record review of Resident #31's annual Minimum Data Set (MDS)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$53,518 in federal fines across 3 penalties.
- $27,378 — penalty dated 2026-05-29
- $13,070 — penalty dated 2026-05-14
- $13,070 — penalty dated 2026-05-14
Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
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 90% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in TX
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Texas Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 676470. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-29, 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.