Longmeadow Healthcare Center
120 Meadowview Dr., Justin, TX 76247 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 120 certified beds · (940) 648-2731 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 Apr 2025
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0567)
- inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (34) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $17,616 in federal fines (most recent 2024-12-27)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (86%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 2 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 | 19.7% | 15.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 1.9% | 3.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 5.9% | 2.4% | 6.5% | typical |
| 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 | 3.9% | 3.3% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 8.2% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 17.0% | 18.0% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 6.2% | 3.8% | 4.7% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 16.0% | 13.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 11.9% | 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 | 87.9% | 88.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.34 | 2.17 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.56 | 2.06 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
28.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that worse than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 31 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.35 therapist hours per resident per day in 2025Q4 — more than 62% of the 13,714 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% 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 14% — 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 | 28.2%CMS range 18.6–43.4 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | worse than U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 12.0%CMS range 8.0–17.9 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 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 | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 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 | 0.0% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 9.1% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.7%CMS range 4.2–13.9 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.59 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 98.2 residents a day — about 82% occupied, or roughly 22 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 2.70 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.26 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.45 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.22 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.94 on weekdays — 24% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.30 to 0.38 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 86% is well above the national median of 45%. 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.
34 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 22 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-12-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for one (Resident #1) of 105 residents reviewed for supervision. The facility failed to provide a lid which screwed onto the cup per Resident #1's care plan and failed to provide one-person supervision while eating per Resident #1's MDS assessment. This resulted in Resident #1 spilling coffee on himself, which went unwitnessed and unassessed for an undetermined amount of time and Resident #1 sustaining burns to his forearm, hip, and waist on 12/14/2024. The noncompliance was identified as Past Non-Compliance Immediate Jeopardy (IJ). The Immediate Jeopardy began on 12/14/24 and ended on 12/15/2024. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the investigation began. This failure could place residents at risk of injury and a decreased quality of life. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet dated 12/14/24, revealed he…
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 · Jcited before2023-10-19 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to provide supervision and assistive devices to each resident to prevent avoidable accidents for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for supervision. The facility failed to ensure the Memory Care unit of the facility was secure when Resident #1, who had a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease with severely impaired cognition and a history of elopement and exit seeking behaviors, eloped from the facility on 10/09/23. The noncompliance was identified as PNC IJ. The IJ began on 10/09/23 and ended 10/09/23. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. The Administrator was notified of the PNC IJ on 10/13/23 at 5:55 PM. The noncompliance was determined to be PNC because the facility corrected the issues with the door security and had monitoring in place to ensure Resident #1 did not elope again. This failure could place residents at risk of accidents, hazards, and improper supervision. Findings Included: Record review 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-07-01 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — patternReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences except when to do so would endanger the health or safety of the resident or other residents for 4 of 10 residents (Resident#24, Resident#28, Resident#39, Resident #62) reviewed for accommodation of needs. The facility failed on 06/29/2026 to ensure the call light system was accessible to a resident, lying on the floor in the shared residents' bathrooms located inside the residents' rooms for Resident#24, Resident#28, Resident#39, and Resident #62 This failure could place residents in the facility at risk of being unable to obtain timely assistance from staff. Findings: Record review of Resident #24's MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 11/08/2024, diagnoses included Dementia, Alzheimer's disease, type 2 diabetes. Resident #24 had a BIMS score of 09 indicating moderate cognitive…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-07-01 · tag F0576 — patternEnsure residents have reasonable access to and privacy in their use of communication methods.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to send and receive mail, and to receive letters, packages and other materials delivered to the facility for the resident through a means other than a postal service, including the right to privacy of such communications for 8 of 8 confidential resident reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to deliver residents' mail on Saturdays. This deficient practice could result in residents not receiving their mail in a timely manner and diminished quality of life. Findings include:A confidential group interview with 8 residents on an undisclosed date at an undisclosed time revealed on Saturdays when the mail arrived at the facility, it was not distributed because there was no office staff to check the mail. One of the group members stated they assisted with mail delivery to the residents during the week but had not delivered any mail to residents on Saturdays. An interview with the Business Office Manager on 07/01/2026 at 9:24 a.m. revealed it was her responsibility to check the mail. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-07-01 · 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 ensure the resident had a right to a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely for 1 of 4 shower rooms (Shower room [ROOM NUMBER]) and 1 or 3 resident bed linens (Resident #300 ) reviewed for a clean homelike environment: The facility failed to provide clean bed linens for Resident #41 on 6/29/26 and 6/30/26.The facility failed to ensure Shower room [ROOM NUMBER] was free from debris and in good working condition on 6/30/26. These failures could place residents at risk of exposure to infectious diseases, other unsanitary health hazards and affect their sense of dignity.Findings Include: 1. Record review of Resident #41's face sheet, dated 7/1/26, reflected an [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 10/1/25. Resident #41 had the following pertinent diagnoses: Chronic Kidney Disease (long term progressive loss of the kidney's ability 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 · E2026-07-01 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — patternProvide activities to meet all resident's needs.
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 provide, based on the comprehensive assessment and care plan and the preferences of each resident, an ongoing program to support residents in their choice of activities, both facility sponsored group and individual activities and independent activities, designed to meet the interests of and support the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, encouraging both independence and interaction in the community for 8 of 8-confidential residents reviewed for activities. The facility failed to provide the residents with scheduled activities on their activities calendar on 6/30/26. This failure could place residents at risk for decline in quality of life, social and mental psychosocial well-being. Findings Include: Record review of the June 2026 Activities Calendar, for 6/30/26, reflected the following activities 11:00 Appetizers, 2:00 Wheelchair Car Wash. During a confidential group interview of 8 residents at an undisclosed date at an undisclosed time revealed the facility's Activities Director…
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 · E2026-07-01 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — patternEnsure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that each resident received, and the facility provided at least three meals daily, at regular times comparable to normal mealtimes in the community for one (lunch on 06/29/26) of one meal observed for dietary services. The facility failed to serve the 06/29/26 lunch meal on time at the scheduled time based on the meal postings which resulted in residents receiving their meals. The scheduled lunch meal time was 400 hall-start service at 11:30 AM-in Hall@11:45 AM Dining room-12:00 PM 300-Hall-12:15 PM 200-Hall-12:30 PM 100-Hall-12:45 PM. The lunch meal was served at 12:30pm on the 400 hall, 12:40pm in the dining room, 1:11pm on the 200 hall and 1:30pm on the 100 hall. This failure could place residents at risk for decreased meal satisfaction, decreased intake, loss of appetite, side effects from medications given without food, and diminished quality of life.Findings included: In a confidential group interview with nine of nine residents on 06/30/26 at 10:00 AM revealed lunch meals were served late it…
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 before2026-07-01 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen in: 1. The facility failed to ensure the chest freezer was free of ice accumulation. 2. The facility failed to ensure sherbert and ice cream containers were sealed in the chest freezer. 3. The facility failed to ensure dish machine temperatures were at minimum of 120 degrees F. These failures could affect residents who received their meals from the facility's only kitchen, by placing them at risk for food-borne illness and food contamination. Findings included: 1. Observation on 06/29/26 at 10:04 AM revealed there was ice accumulation of about 1 to 2 inches around the entire inside the chest freezer. 2. Observation on 06/29/26 at 10:06 AM of the chest freezer in the kitchen revealed the following items not sealed:- orange sherbert container dated 06/17/26 had freezer burn on top (3/4 full).- 1 chocolate ice cream container dated 04/28/26 with freezer burn, unsealed and open around…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-07-01 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 1 of 6 residents (Resident#60) reviewed for ADLs.The facility failed to ensure Resident #60's facial hair on her chin and upper lip was removed on 06/29/2026.This failure could place residents at risk of loss of dignity, risk of infections and a decreased quality of life. Findings include: Record review of Resident #60's MDS assessment, dated 05/27/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 05/20/2026. Resident #60 had diagnoses which included Dementia (memory loss) and Hypertension (Elevated blood pressure). She had a BIMS score of 06, which indicated severe cognitive impairment. Resident #60 needed supervision or touching assistance with toileting hygiene. Record review of Resident #60's care plan, with revision dated 06/04/2026, reflected…
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 · D2026-07-01 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
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 a resident with limited range of motion received appropriate treatment and services to increase range of motion and/or to prevent further decrease in range of motion for one of eight residents (Resident #13) reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to ensure Resident # 13 had his splint for his contracture on his left hand on 06/29/26 and 06/30/26. This failure could place residents at risk for decline in range of motion, decreased mobility, pain and decreased quality of life. Findings include: Record review of Resident #13's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 04/29/26, reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #13 had diagnoses which included traumatic subdural hemorrhage (type of bleeding near your brain that can happen after a head injury), vascular dementia (changes to memory, thinking, and behavior resulting from conditions that affect the blood vessels in the brain) and traumatic…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-07-01 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident who was incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections and to restore continence to the extent possible for one of three (Resident #85) residents reviewed for incontinence care. The facility failed to ensure CNA B provided appropriate perineal care for Resident #85 after an incontinent episode when she failed to clean the resident's scrotum and penis on 06/29/26. This failure could place residents at risk for the development and/or worsening of urinary tract infections.Findings include: Record review of Resident #85's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 05/02/26, reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #85 had diagnoses which included dementia (a decline in cognitive abilities such as memory, thinking, and reasoning, severe enough to interfere with daily life), elevated blood pressure, and diabetes mellitus (elevated blood…
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 · D2026-07-01 · 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 label drugs and biologicals used in the facility in accordance with currently accepted professional principles, and include the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions, and the expiration date when applicable for 2 medication carts (Medication Aide Cart Hall 200 and Nurses Medication Cart Hall 200) of 4 medication carts reviewed for pharmacy services in that: The facility failed to ensure:The blister pack for Resident #50's Tylenol codeine 300-30 mg tablet did not have 1 blister seal broken in the Medication Aide Cart Hall 200 on 6/29/26.Nurses Medication Cart Hall 200 did not have 1 insulin pen for Resident #77 with an open date. Observation of the pen reflected it was used. These failures could affect residents resulting in diminished effectiveness, and not receiving the therapeutic benefits of the medications, and place residents at risk of not having the medication available due to possible drug diversion. 1-Obsevation and record review on 06/29/26 at 11:47 AM of Medication Aide Cart Hall 200,…
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 22 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-07-01 · 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 failed to maintain an infection control program designed to prevent the development and transmission of infection for 2 residents (Resident #85 and Resident #7) of 3 residents observed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure:CNA B changed her gloves and completed hand hygiene during incontinent care for Resident #85 on 6/29/26.LVN E wore proper PPE while preforming wound care for Resident#7 who was on enhanced barrier precautions for a wound on 07/01/26. These failures could place residents at risk for infection and cross contamination of pathogens and illness.1- Record review of Resident #85's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #85 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses included dementia (a decline in cognitive abilities such as memory, thinking, and reasoning, severe enough to interfere with daily life), elevated blood pressure, and diabetes mellitus (elevated 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-06 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide the necessary services for residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for 4 residents (Resident #1, Resident #54, Resident #71, Resident #91) of 8 residents reviewed for ADLs. The facility failed to ensure: 1- Resident #1 had her fingernails cleaned and trimmed on 05/04/25. 2- Resident #54 had his fingernails cleaned and trimmed on both hands on 5/04/25. 3- Resident #71 had her fingernails cleaned and trimmed on both hands on 5/04/25. 4- Resident #91 had his fingernails cleaned and trimmed on 5/04/25. These failures could place residents who were dependent on staff for ADL care at risk for loss of dignity, risk for infections and a decreased quality of life. Findings include: 1-Review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] reflected Resident #1 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of hemiplegia…
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 before2025-05-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen. 1. The facility failed to ensure food item in the facility reach in refrigerator were dated, labeled, and covered. 2. The facility failed to ensure hot food was held above 135 Fahrenheit (F) or higher on the steam table during lunch service on 5/5/25. These failures could affect residents who received their meals from the facility's only kitchen, by placing them at risk for food-borne illness, and food contamination. Findings included: Observation on 5/4/25 at 9:06 AM in the facility reach-in refrigerator revealed: One cup of cut mixed fruit was not dated. Three plates of cut salad that included cucumber, cheese, ham slices, lettuce, tomato were not dated. Six small plastic cups of some kind of white dressing were not labeled or dated. 8-10 Cheese slices were left uncovered, loosely wrapped in plastic wrap, exposing them to air, and not dated. A brown snack bag that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-05-06 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 2 residents (Resident #28 and Resident #57) of 5 residents observed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure: 1- LVN F and CNA G changed their gloves and performed hand hygiene while providing incontinence care to Resident #28 on 04/04/25. 2- CNA A changed his gloves, performed hand hygiene, and donned appropriate PPE when providing incontinent care for Resident #57 who supposed to be on EBP on 05/05/25. These failures could place residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of infections. Findings included: 1-Record review of Resident #28's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #28 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses included…
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 · E2025-05-06 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — patternMake 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 observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident rooms were adequately equipped to allow residents to call for staff assistance through a communication system which relays the call directly to a staff member or to a centralized staff work area for two (Shower room hall 100 and 200 hall) of three shower rooms reviewed for resident call system 1. The facility failed to ensure the call light in shower room area of 100 hall shower room had cord so it can be reached. 2. The facility failed to ensure the call light in shower room area of 200 hall shower room was working. These failures placed resident at risk of a delay in receiving assistance from facility staff and being unable to obtain assistance in the event of an emergency. Findings included: Confidential Group Interview on 05/05/25 at 9:38 AM with 8 of 8 residents revealed one of the residents stated he or she had been complaining about the 100-hall shower room not having a call light cord in the shower room area long…
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 before2025-05-06 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for one (Resident #28) of three residents reviewed for incontinence care. The facility failed to ensure LVN F provided appropriate perineal care for Resident #28 after an incontinent episode when she failed to clean the resident's scrotum and penis on 05/04/25. This failure could place residents at risk for the development and/or worsening of urinary tract infections. Findings included: Record review of Resident #28's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #28 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses included anoxic brain damage (brain injury resulting from a complete lack of oxygen supply to the brain) and need for assistance with personal care. Resident #28's BIMS score not assessed; Resident #28 was unable to complete the interview. The MDS assessment…
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 · D2025-04-17 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse for 1 (Resident #1) of 6 residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility failed to notify Resident #1's attending physician and representative after Resident #2 reported CNA B raised her voice and used inappropriate language while caring for Resident #1 who was on Hospice. CNA B was in the room getting Resident #1 ready for bed. Resident #2 stated she heard CNA B say loudly shut the fuck up to Resident #1 on 03/13/2025. This failure could affect residents of the facility by not addressing their physical, mental, and psychosocial needs for each to attain or maintain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial outcome. The findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 04/17/2025, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included senile degeneration of the brain (decline in…
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 · D2025-04-17 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to review and revise the comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident consistent with the residents rights' that included measurable objectives and time frames to meet the medical, physical, and psychosocial needs identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 (Resident #1) of 6 residents reviewed for care plan reassessment and revision. The facility failed to review and revise Resident #1's comprehensive care plan after her roommate (Resident #2) reported CNA B raised her voice and used inappropriate language while caring for Resident #1 who was on Hospice. CNA B was in the room getting Resident #1 ready for bed. Resident #2 stated she heard CNA B say loudly shut the fuck up to Resident #1 on 03/13/2025. This failure could affect residents of the facility by not addressing their physical, mental, and psychosocial needs for each to attain or maintain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial outcome. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-03-28 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for 4 of 8 (Residents #15, #68, #58 and #30) residents reviewed for respiratory care, in that: 1- The facility failed to ensure Resident #15, and Resident #68 nasal cannula tubing and humidity bottle were labeled or dated. 2- The facility failed to ensure Resident #58, and Resident #30 nasal cannula was properly stored. These failures could place the residents at risk for respiratory infection and not having their respiratory needs met. The findings were: Review of Resident # 15's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included stroke (blood supply to brain is interrupted), hypertension (high blood pressure), Peripheral vascular disease (circulation disorder caused by narrowing of blood vessels), Diabetes Mellitus (high…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-03-28 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure food was stored, prepared, distributed, and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen, reviewed for food storage, labeling, dating, and kitchen sanitation. The facility failed to properly store scoops for the ice machine. The facility failed to ensure that food stored in the dry goods pantry as dated and closed/sealed properly. The facility failed to ensure that only non-expired foods were stored in the dry goods panty. These failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination, other air-borne illnesses, and food-borne illnesses. Findings included: Observations on 03/26/24 from 09:40 AM to 10:21 AM in the facility's only kitchen reflected: o One of two scoops used for the ice machine was lying inside the ice machine and the other one was lying on top of plastic wrap on a shelf next to the ice machine. o Two bags of opened potato chips, of which one was not dated. Neither bag was dated with an opened date. They were stored on the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-28 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences for one (Resident #76) of six residents reviewed for reasonable accommodation of needs. The facility failed to ensure the call light system in Residents #76's rooms was in a position that was accessible to the resident. This failure could place the residents at risk of being unable to obtain assistance when needed and help in the event of an emergency. Findings included: Review of Resident #76's Face Sheet dated 03/27/2024 reflected that resident was an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included muscle wasting and atrophy (decrease in size of a body part), unsteadiness of feet, and abnormalities of gait and mobility. Review of Resident #76's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected that Resident #76 had a moderate cognitive impairment with a BIMS score of 11. Resident #76…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-28 · tag F0567 — failed to protect residents' money held by the home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to manage his or her financial affairs.
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 a right to manage his or her financial affairs for one (Resident#87) of three residents reviewed for trust funds. The facility failed to provide Resident #87 with money from her trust fund when she requested. Resident #87 was required to provide receipts for items purchased with her own money. This failure could place residents whose personal funds were managed by the facility at risk for not receiving their funds when they request. Findings included: Review of Resident #87's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 02/28/24, revealed she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was cognitively intact. Her diagnoses included diabetes and cerebral ischemia (brain injury related to impaired blood flow to the brain) An interview on 03/27/24 at 10:00 AM with Resident #87 revealed there were times when she had to wait for days at a time to obtain money from her trust fund. She said if she asked for more…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-28 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure each resident had a right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment for 2 (Resident #40 and Resident #14) of 8 residents reviewed for safe and homelike environment. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #14 who resided on the secure unit had a homelike environment in her room. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #40 who resided on the secure unit had a homelike environment in her room. This failure could place residents at risk of living in an unsafe, unsanitary, and uncomfortable environment. Findings included: 1. Record Review of Resident #14's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE], reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility 02/02/18. Her cognitive status was severely impaired. Her diagnoses included non-Alzheimer's dementia. 2. Record Review of Resident #40's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE], reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility 10/21/16. Her…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-28 · 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 observation, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights set forth that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for a resident for 3 of (Resident #100, Resident #30 and Resident #49) 7 residents reviewed for Care Plans. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #100 was care planned for oxygen administration. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #30 was care planned for dialysis. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #49 was care planned for his behavior concerns towards female residents. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving necessary care and services. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #100's Face Sheet dated 03/27/2024 reflected that resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. Relevant…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-28 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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 appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding for one (Resident #100) of one resident reviewed for feeding tubes. The facility failed to ensure Resident #100's medications were administered one by one via G-tube (a tube inserted through the abdomen that delivers nutrition directly to the stomach) as per policy. The facility failed to ensure Resident #100's feeding formula tubing was capped when detached from the G-tube port. The facility failed to ensure Resident #100's medications were fully dissolved before administering the medications. The facility failed to ensure Resident #100's syringe used for medication administration via G-tube was cleaned after use. These failures could place residents with G-tubes at risk of infection, at risk for medication-to-medication interaction, and at risk of not receiving the full benefit of the medications administered. Findings included: Review of Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-28 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who required dialysis received such services, consistent with professional standards of practice for one (Resident #30) of one resident undergoing dialysis. The facility failed to ensure Resident #30 had orders pertaining to dialysis. This failure could place the residents undergoing dialysis not receiving proper care and treatment to meet their dialysis needs and place them at risk for complications. Findings included: Review of Resident #30's Face Sheet dated 03/27/2024 reflected that resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included end stage renal disease (kidneys permanently failed to work) and acute kidney failure (loss of function of the kidneys). Resident #30 was also dependent on dialysis (treatment that helps the body remove extra fluid and waste products). Review of Resident #30's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected that Resident #30 was cognitively intact with a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-28 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to establish a system of records of receipt and disposition of all controlled drugs in sufficient detail to ensure that an account of all controlled drugs were maintained and reconciled for one (Resident #16) for three residents reviewed for controlled drug records. The facility failed to account for Resident #16's Fentanyl patches (pain medication) on 11/30/23. This failure placed residents at risk for decreased quality of life, unrelieved pain, and misappropriation of property. Findings included: Record review of Resident #16's face sheet dated 01/13/2023, reflected Resident #16 was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included neurocognitive disorder with Lewy Bodies, hydrocephalus, Parkinson's disease with dyskinesia, hyperlipidemia, opioid dependence, unspecified dementia, lack of coordination, muscle weakness, abnormal gait and mobility, prediabetes, and chronic pain. Record review of Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-03-28 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
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, based on the comprehensive assessment of a resident, residents who had not used psychotropic drugs were not given these drugs unless the medication was necessary to treat a specific condition as diagnosed and documented in the clinical record for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #84) reviewed for unnecessary psychotropic medications. The facility failed to provide an appropriate diagnosis for Resident #84's use of Paliperidone ER (Antipsychotic used to treat schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder). These failures could put residents at risk of receiving unnecessary psychotropic medications. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #84's admission MDS assessment, dated 01/26/24, revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's cognition was severely impaired. The resident had diagnoses including bipolar disorder and non-Alzheimer's disease. The MDS indicate the resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-03-28 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an Infection Prevention and Control Program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 2 (Resident #6 and Resident #32) of 6 residents observed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure that CNA F changed her gloves and performed hand hygiene while providing incontinence care to Resident #6. 2. The facility failed to ensure CNA W changed his gloves and performed hand hygiene while providing incontinence care to Resident #32. These failures could place the residents at risk of cross-contamination and the development of infection. Findings included: Resident #6 Review of Resident #6's Face Sheet dated 03/28/2024 reflected resident was an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included chronic lymphocytic leukemia (a type of cancer of the blood and bone marrow) and need for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-14 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an assessment accurately reflected a resident's status for 4 of 9 residents (Resident #3 #6, #17, and #21), reviewed for accuracy of MDS assessments). 1. The Quarterly MDS assessment of Resident #3 indicated that the resident did not have any behaviors. 2. The Quarterly MDS assessment of Resident #6 indicated that the resident did not have any, mood disorder, behaviors. 3. The Quarterly MDS assess for Resident # 17 did not document behaviors and oxygen use. 4. The Quarterly MDS assess for Resident # 21 did not document psychiatric conditions, medication use and oxygen use. This failure did not ensure accurate assessments that could affect the residents by placing them at risk of inaccurate and incomplete assessments which could result in residents not receiving care to meet their highest level of functioning and psychosocial wellbeing. Findings included: Resident #3 Record review of Resident #3's face sheet, dated 09/14/23,…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-14 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan described the services that were to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 (Residents #21) of 6 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility failed to document Resident #21's oxygen use and interventions were addressed on her comprehensive care plan. These failures could place residents at risk for possible adverse side effects, adverse consequences, and decreased quality of life and care and worsening of contractures. Findings included: A record review of resident #21 face sheet dated 09/13/2023 r revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with primary Diagnosis: secondary and unspecified malignant neoplasm of axilla and upper 05/11/2021 primary admitting dx limb lymph nodes malignant neoplasm of unspecified site of unspecified breast other seizures. Acute embolism and thrombosis of superficial…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-14 · 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 2 of 9 residents (Resident #17 and Resident #21) reviewed for respiratory care in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #17, and 21's oxygen tubing was labeled and dated. These deficient practices could affect residents who received oxygen therapy and could result in residents receiving incorrect or inadequate oxygen support and could result in a decline in health. Resident #17 A record Review of Resident #17 face sheet dated 09/13/2023 revealed a [AGE] year-old male that was admitted initially on 06/03/21 and again on and 09/07/23: His primary diagnosis included: Acute Chronic Diastolic (Congestive) Heart Failure (Heart failure), Acute Respiratory Failure with Hypercapnia (a condition of abnormally elevation of carbon dioxide levels in blood), Chronic Pain, and symbolic dysfunction (problems in communication…
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
$17,616 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $17,616 — penalty dated 2024-12-27
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 CREATIVE SOLUTIONS IN HEALTHCARE — 149 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 →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 1 of 5 | 2.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 3.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
The other 148 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.1★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 148; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FANNIN COUNTY HOSPITAL AUTHORITY | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 10/01/2022 |
| HOLT, ERIN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 02/25/2020 |
| KEETON, WENDY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 10/29/2012 |
| KISSLING, MONICA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 06/21/2017 |
| MCBEAN, PATRICIA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 08/30/2021 |
| SANDERSON, CLARK | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 10/29/2012 |
| TROMPLER, KELLY | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | — | since 02/22/2022 |
| HUGGINS, LINDA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 10/01/2022 |
| WILLIG, ZACHARY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 01/01/2025 |
| JUSTIN I ENTERPRISES, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2022 |
| BLAKE, GARY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 10/01/2022 |
| BLAKE, MALISA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 10/01/2022 |
| TIBBELS, JASON | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/13/2025 |
| WATSON, BRADLEE | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/13/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 17 rows in the source record cover these 14 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
About 75% 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 2026-09-01 — CMS provider number 675185. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-07-01, 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.