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

Richard A. Anderson (state Of Texas Veterans Land

14041 Cottingham Road, Houston, TX 77048 · Government - State · 120 certified beds · (346) 293-9600 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited Jun 20241 immediate-jeopardy citation$14,730 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

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)
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (33% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
  • the CMS record shows $14,730 in federal fines (most recent 2024-06-23)
  • about 26% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

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) 5 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
1801 Country Place Pkwy · (713) 436-4143 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
14455 Cullen Blvd · (713) 731-0880 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
30years1.7 mi
11930 Panay Dr · (713) 264-6400 · Call to confirm hours
Park
4610 Allison Rd · (713) 991-7700 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 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.

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 increased17.6%15.8%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight6.0%3.0%5.4%worse
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 infection0.2%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 injury4.5%3.3%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened16.4%14.0%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication14.0%18.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.7%3.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control15.4%13.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table10.8%9.6%17.1%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days0.462.171.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.732.061.80better

* 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.

0.46U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.24hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.20hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.46 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 77% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 23% 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
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 SNFnot 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 dischargenot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. 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 data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. 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 data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. 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 identifiednot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. 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 settingnot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. 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 data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. 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 staynot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsenednot reported — The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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 SNFsnot 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

0.55
RN hours/ resident / day
0.68
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.84
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.08
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.47
RN hoursweekends
33.3%
Total nursing turnover
18.8%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 115.8 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 4.08 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.553 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.84 is at or above 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 3.62 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.26 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.59 to 0.47 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 33% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-09-11)
1
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-22)

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.

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.

14 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Immediate jeopardy · K2024-06-23 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 2 (Resident #1 and Resident #2) of 7 residents reviewed for accidents hazards/supervision in that: -Resident #1 who resided in the Memory Care Unit was let out of the facility by CNA A on 2/16/24 at 6:45 pm and located by the Resident Representative around 8:30 pm on the corner of a major high traffic street corridor approximately ½ mile away. -The facility failed to prevent Resident #2 in Memory Care Unit from ingesting shampoo on 5/17/24 which resulted in emergency treatment services at the local hospital. An Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 06/21/24 at 3:49 pm. The Immediate Jeopardy was removed on 06/23/24 at 12:54 pm; however, the facility remained out of compliance at a scope of pattern and a severity level of no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is not immediate jeopardy due to the facility's need to complete in-service training and evaluate the…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-09-11 · 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, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident is offered a therapeutic diet when there is a nutritional problem, and the health care provider ordered a therapeutic diet for 1 of 24 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for nutrition status. The facility failed to provide Resident #4 with a fortified meal plan as ordered by his physician between 7/22/25 and 9/11/25. This failure could affect all residents on therapeutic diets by placing them at increased risk for significant weight loss and malnutrition. The findings included: Record review of Resident #4's admission Record generated on 9/10/25 revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses of dementia (causes memory loss in older adults), parkinsonism ( a clinical syndrome characterized by tremor, rigidity and postural instability), weakness, gastro-esophageal reflux disease (a digestive disease in which stomach acid or bile irritates the food pipe lining), diabetes type II (a long-term condition…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-09-11 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the MDS assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 of 24 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for assessments, in that: Resident #3's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] inaccurately indicated he did not receive insulin injections during the lookback period of 7 days. This failure could place residents at risk of not having accurate assessments to receive care. The findings included: Record review of Resident #3's admission Record generated on 9/11/2025 revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses of vascular dementia (causes memory loss in older adults) and diabetes type II (a long-term condition in which the body has trouble controlling blood sugar and using it for energy). He was [AGE] years of age. Record review of Resident #3's Care Plan dated 8/28/2023 revealed he was at risk of hyperglycemia (abnormally high level of glucose in the blood) or hypoglycemia (a condition in which the body's blood sugar…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-22 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure 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 18%, based on 5 errors out of 27 opportunities, which involved 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) and 1 of 3 staff (MA A) observed during medication administration reviewed for medication error, in that: -MA A administered the incorrect dose of Chlor-Con (potassium chloride) to Resident #1. -MA A failed to administer 4 additional medications/supplements prior to surveyor intervention. -MA A had documented she administered the 4 medications/supplements. -The resident did not receive the medications/supplements until after surveyor intervention. These failures placed the resident at risk for inadequate therapeutic outcomes, increased negative side effects, and a decline in health. Findings include: Record review of the admission Record (copied 08/22/24) for Resident #1 revealed he was [AGE] years old and was admitted 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-06-23 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — pattern
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure all alleged violations involving neglect were reported immediately or no later than 24 hours after the allegation was made for 2 of 7 residents (CR#1 and Resident #2) reviewed for reporting in that: -The facility failed to report to the State agency CR #1's fall incident with serious injury (a left distal clavicle fracture) resulting in hospitalization on 3/5/24. -The facility failed to report to the State agency Resident #2's incident of ingesting a non-food item and was transported via emergency services for hospital treatment. These failures could affect all residents and could result in undetected neglect and emotional distress leading to serious harm/injury. Findings included: Record review of CR #1's face sheet dated 6/20/24 revealed a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. His diagnoses included Parkinson's disease with dyskinesia (a disorder of the central nervous system that affects movement, often including tremors), 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-22 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices for 1 of 12 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for quality of care. LVN A failed to ensure Resident #1's scalp wound was treated and dressed as ordered by his physician. This failure could place residents with skin injuries at risk of worsening skin injury, infection, and pain. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet revealed he was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included sepsis (a life-threatening condition resulting from the presence of harmful microorganisms in the blood or other tissues and the body's response to their presence), cognitive communication deficit (problems with communication that have and underlying), squamous cell carcinoma (abnormal, accelerated growth of squamous cells) of the…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-06-23 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — pattern
    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 and had a catheter upon admission, received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections and to restore continence to the extent possible for 2 (Resident #29 and #50) of 3 residents reviewed for incontinent care. -The facility failed to ensure Resident #29's foley bag and tubing was not placed on the floor. -The facility failed to ensure CNA C followed appropriate infection control procedures during foley care for Resident #29. -The facility failed to ensure Resident #50's foley bag was positioned below the bladder. These failures could place residents at risk for pain, infection, injury, and hospitalization. Findings included: Resident #29 Record review of Resident #29's admission face sheet revealed a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included cerebral infraction (a result of disrupted blood flow to the brain),…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-06-23 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — pattern
    Ensure 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 10%, based on 3 errors out of 28 opportunities, which involved 1 (Residents #29) of 5 residents reviewed for medication errors. -RN A failed to administer three medications scheduled for 8:00 a.m. during Resident #29's medication administration through a g-tube. This failure could place residents at risk of inadequate therapeutic outcomes, increased negative side effects, and a decline in health. Findings include: Record review of Resident #29's admission face sheet revealed a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included cerebral infraction (a result of disrupted blood flow to the brain), gastrostomy (used to provide a route feeding to the stomach) dysphagia (impairment or difficulty in swallowing) and hypertension (blood is pumping with more force than normal through arteries). 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-06-23 · 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 observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with professional principles, and included the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions, and the expiration date when applicable for 2 of 2 medication rooms (Medication Rooms) 1 out of 2 nursing medication carts (nurse medication cart for POA A), and residents reviewed for medication storage. - The facility failed to ensure nurse cart did not have discontinued, opened undated and opened medication not stored in its original packet. - The facility failed to ensure the Medication Rooms (POD D and POD C) did not contain expired medication, and unlabeled medication not stored in he delivery packet - The facility failed to ensure RN A did not leave medications in a medication cup on top of the unlocked medication cart and unattended. - The facility failed to ensure RN A did not leave breathing treatment medication for Resident #13 in room for the resident to administer himself. These failures could place residents at risk 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-06-23 · 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 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 4 of 6 Staff (CNA S, RN A, Dietary Aide O, and Laundry Aide H) reviewed for infection control. - The facility failed to ensure CNA S followed proper hand hygiene during hydration. - The facility failed to ensure RN A followed proper hand hygiene and infection control procedure during g- tube medication administration for Resident #29. - The facility failed to ensure RN A followed proper hand hygiene and infection control procedure during ACCU CHECK for Resident #58, Resident #75, and Resident #92. - The facility failed to ensure Dietary Aide O did not wear gloves in the hallway. - The facility failed to ensure Laundry Aide followed proper hand hygiene when he demonstrated hand washing. These deficient practices could affect residents and place…

    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 · D2023-06-23 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review the facility failed refer all residents with newly evident or possible serious mental disorder, intellectual disability, or a related condition for level II resident review upon a significant change in status assessment for two (Residents #15 and #32) of six residents reviewed for PASRR. The facility failed to ensure an accurate additional PASRR Level I screening was completed for Residents #15 and #32. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving necessary care and services in accordance with individually assessed needs. Findings included: Resident #15 Record review of Resident #15's admission record revealed a [AGE] year-old resident admitted on [DATE]. The admission record documented he had diagnoses including dementia (a term used to describe a group of symptoms affecting memory, thinking and social abilities severely enough to interfere with daily life) diagnosed 7/30/2020, psychotic disturbance (a collection of symptoms that affect the mind, where there…

    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 · D2023-06-23 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who need respiratory care were provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 (Resident #13) of 3 residents reviewed for respiratory care. - The facility failed to provide Resident #13 appropriate nasal cannula for oxygen administration to prevent the prongs from hurting the resident's nostrils. - The facility failed to prevent Resident #13 from adjusting the oxygen setting on the concentrator. These failures placed residents who received oxygen therapy at risk of respiratory complications. Findings included: Record review of Resident #13's admission face sheet revealed an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included dementia (loss of cognitive function, thinking,), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic respiratory failure, and hypertension (blood is pumping with more force than normal through arteries). Record review of Resident #13's…

    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 · D2023-06-23 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — isolated
    Dispose of garbage and refuse properly.
    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 garbage and refuse was disposed properly for 2 of 2 dumpsters reviewed for garbage disposal. -The facility failed to ensure the dumpster lids and doors were secured. This failure could place residents at risk of infection from improperly disposed garbage. Findings include: Observation on 06-20-23 at 8:30 am, with the Food Service Manager revealed the facility's dumpster area, which was in the lot behind the dietary department had a 2 commercial -size dumpsters and the lids and doors were opened. Interview on 06-20-23 at 9:00 am, with the Food Service Manager she stated the dumpster lids always must be closed to keep vermin, pests, and insects out of the dumpster and from entering the facility. She also stated that she is responsible for all requirements be met in the Food Service Department. She will in-service the dietary staff on following Policy and Procedure for Garbage Disposal Record review of the facility policy and procedure dated June 1, 2019, revealed that outdoor storage shall be constructed…

    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 · D2023-06-23 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolated
    Make sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
    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 the call system was accessible to the resident at each resident's bedside for one (Resident #15) of twenty-two residents reviewed for call lights. -The facility failed to ensure the call light system in Resident #15's room was in a position which was accessible. This failure could place residents at risk of being unable to obtain assistance in the event of an emergency. Findings include: Record review of Resident #15's admission record revealed a [AGE] year-old resident admitted on [DATE]. The admission record documented he had diagnoses including dementia (a term used to describe a group of symptoms affecting memory, thinking and social abilities severely enough to interfere with daily life) diagnosed 7/30/2020, psychotic disturbance (a collection of symptoms that affect the mind, where there has been some loss of contact with reality) diagnosed 7/30/2020, mood disturbance (affective disorders are a set of psychiatric diseases, also called mood…

    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

“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

$14,730 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $14,730 — penalty dated 2024-06-23

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.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to TEXVET — 9 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 52.7+2.3 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.3+1.7 vs chain
Staffing 5 of 53.9+1.1 vs chain
Quality measures 5 of 54.0+1.0 vs chain
The other 8 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.7★, per CMS)

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 / managerTypeRoleSince
JOHANNS, KATHYIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 03/08/2019
BERKELY, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 03/08/2019
HAVENS, MARKIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/08/2019
TOUCHSTONE VETERANS MANAGEMENT LTD.OrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/21/2019
FELLBAUM, ERNESTIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/08/2019
STUDER, STANLEYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/08/2019
STUMBERG, ERICIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/08/2019
STUMBERG, LOUISIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/08/2019

The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

1 organizational owner 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.

$20.6M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+12.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$4.7M
Related-party expense26% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 11%Medicare 0%Other / private 89%

This home reported $4.7M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 26% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

$424per resident / day
operating cost
$12,878per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$485per 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 676479. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-11, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next