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

Avir at Kennedale

413 Mansfield Cardinal Road, Kennedale, TX 76060 · For profit - Corporation · 58 certified beds · (817) 561-4495 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citations — no harm found (F0607, F0609) — most recent May 2026Resident-funds citation (F0565)1 immediate-jeopardy citation2 immediate-jeopardy citations CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$16,437 in federal fines
Insights

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

Worth asking about
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
  • inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
  • 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 (28) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $16,437 in federal fines (most recent 2025-09-03)
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (72%) 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.

1/5
CMS overall
1 of 5
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

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
6220 US 287 Hwy · (817) 478-1313 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Kroger1.6 mi
5101 W. Sublett Rd. · (817) 516-3763 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
201 W Kennedale Pkwy Ste 620 · (210) 639-6995 · Call to confirm hours
Park
(817) 985-2105 · 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 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 held steady at 1 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 rating1★
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 increased12.2%15.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight0.0%3.0%5.4%check this — see note marked star below the table
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 infection2.3%0.8%2.0%worse 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 injury8.1%3.3%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened15.3%14.0%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication16.8%18.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.8%3.8%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control10.3%13.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table11.7%9.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%88.0%79.4%better

* 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.

0.45U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.27hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.14hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.45 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 75% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 10% 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 number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identifiednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF staynot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsenednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in 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

0.29
RN hours/ resident / day
1.19
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.44
Aide hours/ resident / day
2.92
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.16
RN hoursweekends
72.2%
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 58 beds and averages 37.6 residents a day — about 65% occupied, or roughly 20 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 2.92 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.29 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.44 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 2.47 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.11 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.34 to 0.16 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 72% 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

14
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-09-03)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-07-16)

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.

28 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 15 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Immediate jeopardy · K2025-09-03 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 resident (Resident #24) of 6 residents reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to develop a person-centered comprehensive care plan for Resident #24, who was at high risk for elopement and who had exit-seeking behaviors. Resident #24 eloped from the facility on 08/08/25, she was found near an apartment complex on a busy street next to the facility by a passerby and brought her back to the facility. The noncompliance was identified as past non-compliance. The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) began on 08/08/25 and ended on 08/12/25. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. The failure placed the resident at risk for serious adverse outcomes including serious…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2025-09-03 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    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 ensure that the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as is possible and each resident received adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #24) reviewed for supervision. The facility failed to ensure Resident #24, who had a history of exit seeking behaviors and was a high risk for elopement, eloped from the facility on 08/08/25. The resident was found near an apartment complex on a busy street next to the facility by a passerby, who brought her back to the facility. The noncompliance was identified as past non-compliance. The Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) began on 08/08/25 and ended on 08/12/25. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure placed residents at risk of harm and/or serious injury.Findings included: Record review of Resident #24's annual MDS assessment, dated 07/10/25, reflected the resident was an [AGE] year-old female,…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Immediate jeopardy · Kcited before2023-10-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to 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 four (Residents #1, #2, #3, and #4) of six residents and two (CNA B and CNA C) out of five staff in the facility reviewed for infection control practices and transmission-based precautions. 1. The facility failed to ensure Residents #1 and #2 were separated after Resident #2 tested positive for COVID on 10/19/23, and Resident #1 did not. 2. The facility failed to ensure Residents #3 and #4 were separated after Resident #4 tested positive for COVID on 10/19/23, and Resident #3 did not. 3. The facility failed to ensure staff utilized PPE appropriately to prevent cross contamination between residents positive with COVID-19 and residents who were not positive for the virus. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified on 10/23/23 at…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-05 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to report violations of abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property to the State Survey Agency for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility failed to report an injury of unknown source to HHSC when Resident #1 sustained a dislocated left shoulder on 04/19/26.This failure could place the residents at risk of injuries not being thoroughly investigated and potential neglect. Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], revealed she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included emphysema, dementia, and cognitive impairment. Her BIMS score was 1, indicating severe cognitive impairment. Her Functional Ability assessment indicated she used a manual wheelchair for mobility and was reliant on staff for her ADLs; the resident had no impairment of upper…

    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 · Ecited before2026-04-15 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — pattern
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to use the service of a Registered Nurse (RN) for at least eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week for 13 of 60 days reviewed during a look back period from 02/07/26 to 04/05/26 for weekend coverage. The facility failed to have RN coverage in the facility for eight consecutive hours on 02/08/26, 02/14/26, 02/15/26, 02/21/26, 02/22/26, 02/29/26, 03/07/26, 03/08/26, 03/14/26, 03/15/26, 03/22/26, 03/28/26, 03/29/26.This failure could place residents at risk of not having their nursing and medical needs met and improper care.Findings included: Record review of the facility's Detailed Hours report, printed on 04/15/26, reflected there was no RN coverage on the weekends for the following dates:02/08/26, 02/14/26, 02/15/26, 02/21/26, 02/22/26, 02/29/26, 03/07/26, 03/08/26, 03/14/26, 03/15/26, 03/22/26, 03/28/26, and 03/29/26.During an interview on 04/15/26 at 3:09 PM, the ADON revealed the facility was having a hard time finding and keeping an RN for weekend RN coverage and they had been without one for quite a while. 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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-15 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure 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 ensure a resident who was fed by enteral means received appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #2) reviewed for feeding tubes.LVN C failed to follow physician orders and added water to Resident #2's g-tube (device inserted through the belly into the stomach to deliver nutrition, fluids, and medications). formula prior to administering her feeding. This failure could place residents at risk for a decline in health or adverse effects due to inappropriate management of G-tube care.Findings included:Record review of Resident #2's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included hypertension (high blood pressure), hyperlipidemia (a condition of high cholesterol), respiratory failure (a condition in which there is not enough oxygen in the tissues in the body), diabetes (a condition that happens when 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-15 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide 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 provide pharmaceutical services including procedures that assured the accurate dispensing and administering of all drugs and biologicals to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 4 resident (Resident #2) reviewed for pharmaceutical services.LVN C failed to follow the facility policy when she mixed and crushed Resident #2's medications and administered them via g-tube (device inserted through the belly into the stomach to deliver nutrition, fluids, and medications).This failure placed residents at risk of not receiving the therapeutic dosages of their medications, gastric upset, pain, and symptomatic changes. Findings included:Record review of Resident #2's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included hypertension (high blood pressure), hyperlipidemia (a condition of high cholesterol), respiratory failure (a condition in which there is not enough…

    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 · Dcited before2026-04-15 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program, including hand hygiene, designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment, and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for infection control practices. CNA A failed to perform hand hygiene and glove changes while providing Resident #1 with incontinence care and a shower.These failures could place residents at risk of cross-contamination and infections. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet, dated 04/15/26, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE].Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], reflected the resident's diagnoses included: hemiplegia following cerebral infarction (one-sided paralysis caused by brain tissue damage), non-Alzheimer's dementia (cognitive disorders caused by diseases other…

    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 · D2026-02-19 · tag F0687 — failed to care for feet properly — isolated
    Provide appropriate foot care.
    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 that residents receive proper treatment and care to maintain mobility and good foot health by providing foot care and treatment, in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for foot care.The facility failed to follow physician orders for Resident #1's wound care on her toe.This failure could place residents with wounds to their feet at risk of not receiving proper foot care and developing infections in their wounds. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 12/11/25, reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses which included a stroke that affected the left side of her body, pressure ulcers, and morbid obesity. Record review of Resident #1's care plan, dated 09/23/25, reflected she had skin concerns related to mobility issues, and ADL self-care deficit related to her stroke. 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-15 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    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 a resident with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing for 1 of 4 resident (Resident #1) reviewed for pressure ulcers.The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received wound care according to physician orders on 11/05/25, 11/21/25, 11/24/25 and 11/27/25.The failure placed residents at risk for pressure ulcer deterioration and infection.Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 12/15/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE], readmitted on [DATE] and discharged on 12/02/25. Record review of Resident #1's admission MDS assessment, dated 11/06/25, reflected his diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (ongoing lung condition caused by damage to the lungs), essential hypertension (high blood pressure),…

    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 before2025-09-03 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
    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 a private meeting space for the residents' monthly council meetings for 8 of 8 confidential residents reviewed for resident council. The facility failed to provide a private space for resident council meetings.This failure could place residents, who attended resident council meetings, at risk of not being able to voice concerns due to a lack of privacy. Findings included:During a confidential resident group interview with eight residents on 08/06/25 beginning at 3:00 PM, the facility arranged for the meeting to be held in an open dining room located near the facility's central nurses' station and front entry door. There were no doors that could be closed to ensure the residents' privacy during the meeting. The Activity Director placed portable privacy screens in the middle of the dining room and one by an entry door to the dining room. The Activity Director placed two signs outside the dining room, which reflected: STOP Resident Council in Progress. Although the privacy screen provided visual privacy,…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-09-03 · 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 observations, record reviews, and interviews the facility failed to ensure residents maintained acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range and electrolyte balance, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrates that this is not possible or resident preferences indicate otherwise for 2 residents (Resident #6 and #7) of 5 residents reviewed for quality of care. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #6, who received nutrition via tube feeding and had unavoidable weight loss, was weighed weekly as ordered by the physician. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7, who had unplanned weight gain, was weighed weekly as ordered by the physician. This failure could place the residents at risk of weight changes going unnoticed leading to a worsening of their medical conditions. Findings included:1. Record review of Resident #6's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], reflected the resident was an [AGE] year-old female, who admitted to the facility on…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-09-03 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — pattern
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to use the services of a Registered Nurse (RN) for at least eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week for 5 of 34 days (04/20/25, 06/01/25, 06/21/25, 7/19/25 and 07/27/25) reviewed during a look back period from 04/01/25 to 07/31/25 for weekend coverage. The facility failed to have RN coverage in the facility for eight consecutive hours on 04/20/25, 06/01/25, 06/21/25, 7/19/25 and 07/27/25. This failure could place residents at risk for not having their nursing and medical needs met and improper care.Findings included:Record review of facility Employee Timecards, dated 08/06/25 reflected no RN coverage for the following days: 04/20/25 (SUN), 06/01/25 (SUN), 06/21/25 (SAT), 7/19/25 (SAT) and 07/27/25 (SUN). Interview on 08/07/25 at 11:13 AM, with the DON revealed ADON C was responsible for completing nursing schedules. She stated she recently took over schedules after ADON C left on 07/23/25. The DON stated she was not aware the facility did not have RN coverage for the dates listed above. She stated ADON C never…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 15 citations
  • Potential for harm · E2025-09-03 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — pattern
    Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of the resident.
    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 the menus met the nutritional needs of residents in accordance with the established national guidelines and were followed for 1 of 3 meals (lunch meal 08/06/25) observed. [NAME] D failed to follow the menu when preparing the pureed lunch meal on 08/06/25. The failure could place residents, who were on a pureed diet, at risk for a decrease in nutritive status, loss of appetite, decreased intake and unwanted weight loss.Findings included:Record review of the facility Week at a Glance menu dated Week 1 Spring/Summer2025, reflected the menu for the lunch service for Wednesday (Day 4) was Cilantro Lime Chicken, [NAME] Pilaf, Squash & Red Peppers, Dinner Roll, Margarine, Fruit Crisp, Beverage.Record review of the Pureed Cilantro Lime Chicken recipe reflected the following: .Add broth, as needed; blend until smooth. 1. If product needs thinning, gradually add an appropriate amount of liquid (NOT WATER) to achieve a smooth, pudding or soft mashed potato consistency.Record review of Pureed [NAME] Pilaf recipe…

    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 · E2025-09-03 · tag F0805 — failed to prepare food in a form residents can eat — pattern
    Ensure each resident receives and the facility provides food prepared in a form designed to meet individual 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 ensure food was prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs for 1 of 2 meals (lunch) reviewed for food meeting residents' needs.The facility failed to prepare and serve pureed Cilantro Lime Chicken as a pudding consistency for residents who required pureed diets during the lunch meal on 08/06/25.This deficient practice could affect residents and place them at risk of not receiving meals that meet their needs.Findings included:Record review of the facility Week at a Glance menu dated Week 1 Spring/Summer2025, reflected the menu for the lunch service for Wednesday (Day 4) was Cilantro Lime Chicken, [NAME] Pilaf, Squash & Red Peppers, Dinner Roll, Margarine, Fruit Crisp, Beverage.Observation on 08/06/25 at 10:45 AM revealed [NAME] D making pureed lunch. [NAME] D put the lime chicken in the processor, then proceeded to use the processor food pusher to add water twice and added it to the chicken. [NAME] D added the water without measuring, added thickener and blended the mixture. [NAME] D blended 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-09-03 · tag F0553 — failed to let residents help plan their care — isolated
    Allow resident to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care.
    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 residents had the right to participate in the development and implementation of their person-centered plan of care for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #32) reviewed for quarterly care plans.The facility failed to invite Resident #32 and responsible parties with 4 quarterly care plan conference meetings for the last 12 months. Resident #32's last care plan meeting was dated 08/07/24. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving inadequate interventions not individualized to their care needs.Findings included:Record review of Resident #32's face sheet, dated 08/07/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 08/03/23 and returned 03/08/25. Record review of Resident #32's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected her diagnoses included hypertension (high blood pressure), dementia, cognitive communication deficit, and depression. The MDS reflected the resident had severe cognitive impairment with…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-09-03 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolated
    Develop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
    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 implement their written policies and procedures to prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of resident property for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #24) reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility failed to implement their policy on reporting an incident involving Resident #24, who had a history of exit seeking behaviors and was a high risk for elopement, eloped from the facility on 08/08/25. The resident was found near an apartment complex on a busy street next to the facility by a passerby who brought her back to the facility. This failure could place the residents in the facility at risk of neglect and lack of timely reporting of incidents.Findings included: Record review of the facility's current Abuse/ Reportable Events policy, dated 1/10/17, revealed the following: It is everyone's responsibility to recognize, report, and promptly investigate actual or alleged abuse, neglect, exploitation, mistreatment…

    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 · Dcited before2025-09-03 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    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, which included injuries of unknown source, were reported immediately, but no later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, if the events that caused the allegation involved abuse or resulted in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that caused the allegation did not involve abuse and did not result in serious bodily injury, to the administrator of the facility and to other officials, which included the State Survey Agency, in accordance with State law through established procedures for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #24) reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility failed to report an incident to HHSC involving Resident #24, who had a history of exit seeking behaviors and was a high risk for elopement, eloped from the facility on 08/08/25. The resident was found near an apartment complex on a busy street next to the facility by a passerby who brought her back 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-09-03 · tag F0627 — isolated
    Ensure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/discharge.
    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 develop and implement an effective discharge planning process that is consistent with the discharge rights set forth at 483.15(b) as applicable and involve the resident and resident representative in the development of the discharge plan and inform the resident and resident representative of the final plan for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #24) reviewed for discharges. The facility failed to involve Resident #24's POA in the discharge plan prior to Resident #24 being transferred to a different facility on 08/11/25. This failure could place residents at risk of not having complete records after permanent discharge from the facility. Findings included: Record review of Resident #24's discharged MDS assessment, dated 08/11/25, reflected the resident was an [AGE] year-old female, who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 08/11/25 to Nursing Home. Resident #24 entry/discharge reporting - Discharge assessment -return not anticipated. The…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-09-03 · tag F0628 — isolated
    Provide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
    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 a resident had a discharge summary that included, but not limited to a recapitulation of the resident's stay, that included but was not limited to, diagnoses, course of illness/treatment or therapy, and pertinent lab, radiology and consultant results and a final summery of the resident's status to include items, at the time of the discharge that was available to release to authorized persons and agencies, with the consent of the resident or resident's representative for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #24) reviewed for discharge summary. The facility failed to complete a discharge summary for Resident #24. This failure could place residents at risk of not having complete records after permanent discharge from the facility. Findings included: Record review of Resident #24's Discharge MDS assessment, dated 08/11/25, reflected the resident was an [AGE] year-old female, who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 08/11/25 to Nursing…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-09-03 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop 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 interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the comprehensive care plan was reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment for 1 (Resident #32) of 6 residents for care plan revisions. The facility failed to review and revise Resident #32's comprehensive care plan after the MDS assessment was completed on 06/25/25. Resident #32's last care plan meeting was dated 08/07/24.This failure could affect residents and could result in resident's needs not being met. Record review of Resident #32's face sheet, dated 08/07/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 08/03/23 and returned 03/08/25. Record review of Resident #32's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected her diagnoses included hypertension (high blood pressure), dementia, cognitive communication deficit, and depression. The MDS reflected the resident had severe cognitive impairment with a BIMS score of 4. Record review of Resident #32's care plan, last…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-03 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were stored in locked compartments and permit only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for 1 of 16 residents (Resident #26) on one hall reviewed for storage of medications.Resident #26 had 1 tablet sucralfate at her bed side unsupervised on 08/05/25. This failure could place residents at risk of consuming unsafe medications.Findings included:Record review of Resident #26's face sheet, dated 08/07/25, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 07/04/24 and returned 07/12/25. Record review of Resident #26's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected her diagnoses included dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), oral phase, nutritional deficiency (malnutrition), gastro-esophageal reflux disease without esophagitis (heartburn), anxiety disorder, depression and hypertension (high blood pressure). Resident #26's BIMS score was 15 which indicated cognition was…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-07-16 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — pattern
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to use the service of a Registered Nurse (RN) for at least eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week for 9 of 30 days (04/13/24, 05/11/24, 05/12/24, 05/19/24, 06/09/24, 06/15/24, 06/23/24, 07/06/24, and 07/07/24) reviewed during a look back period from 04/09/24 to 07/15/24 for weekend coverage. The facility failed to have RN coverage in the facility for eight consecutive hours on 04/13/24, 05/11/24, 05/12/24, 05/19/24, 06/09/24, 06/15/24, 06/23/24, 07/06/24, and 07/07/24. This failure could place residents at risk for not having their nursing and medical needs met and improper care. Findings included: Review of the facility's Employee Time Cards, dated 7/14/24, reflected the following: - RN Z worked from 8:00 AM to 12:00 PM (4 total hours), took a break for lunch, then resumed work at 12:30 PM to 5:00 PM (4.5 total hours) on 04/13/24. - RN Z worked from 7:12 AM to 11:12 AM (4 total hours), took a break for lunch, then resumed work at 11:42 AM to 2:58 PM (3.27 total hours) and the DON worked from 2:00 PM to 4:00 PM (2…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-07-16 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure, in accordance with State and Federal laws, all drugs and biologicals were stored in locked compartments and were labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for 1 (Resident #134) of 9 residents reviewed for pharmacy services. LVN D failed to put her initials, date, and time on Resident #134's IV medication bag and tubing when she administered the IV antibiotic, Meropenem. These failures could place residents at risk for medication error and delay in medication administration. Findings included: Review of Resident #134's face sheet, dated 07/16/24, revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. Resident #134's diagnoses which included sepsis without septic shock (a life-threatening medical emergency caused by body's overwhelming response to an infection) and bacteremia (the presence of bacteria in blood). Review of Resident #134's physician's orders dated 07/13/24 reflected: (Meropenem…

    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 · Dcited before2023-12-07 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    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 received care, consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent pressure ulcers and did not develop pressure ulcers unless the individual's clinical condition demonstrated they were unavoidable for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pressure ulcers. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's off-loading boot, which was used to prevent skin breakdown, was placed on the resident. This failure could place residents at risk for the development of pressure injuries. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 12/07/2023, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included unspecified psychosis (experiencing symptoms of schizophrenia or other psychotic symptoms), acute respiratory disease (affects the lungs, bronchus and respiration), blindness in right eye, pressure induced deep tissue damage on…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-06-06 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
    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 a private meeting space for residents' monthly council meetings for 9 of 9 confidential residents reviewed for resident council. The facility failed to provide a private space for resident council meetings. This failure could place residents, who attended resident council meetings, at risk of not being able to voice concerns due to a lack of privacy. Findings included: Observation and interview, during the confidential group interview with nine residents on 06/05/23 beginning at 10:00 AM, revealed the meeting was held in an open dining room located near the facility's central nurses' station and front entry door. There were no doors that could be closed to ensure the residents' privacy during the meeting. Staff were observed walking through the area while the meeting was in progress. During the confidential group meeting, all nine residents revealed when they had meetings, the meetings were always held in the open dining room area. Residents expressed there were no private areas in the facility 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-06-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in 1 of 1 kitchen. The facility failed to ensure: - the dishmachine was working properly and did not have to been run mulitple times to reach 120 degrees F; - the Dietary Manager was aware of the dishmachine was a sanitizing dishmachine and not a high temperature dishmachine; - Dishwasher Aide B was documenting actual dishmachine tempteratures; and - food stored in the pantry was properly stored, labeled and dated. This failure could place residents at risk for food contamination and food borne illness. Findings included: Observation and interview in the kitchen pantry on 06/04/23 at 9:08 AM revealed a bag of chocolate cake mix was not properly sealed, with a date of 04/20 written on the outside of the manufacturer's bag. The cake mix was open sitting on the top shelf. In the freezer, there was a box labeled fully cooked sausage patties in open plastic, not properly sealed, with a date of 06/03/23. In the refrigerator…

    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
  • No harm found · C2024-07-16 · tag F0851 — widespread
    Electronically submit to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow guidelines for mandatory submission of staffing information based on payroll data in a uniform format by electronically submitting to CMS complete and accurate direct care staffing information, including information for agency and contract staff, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data in a uniform format according to specifications established by CMS for 8 (11/16/24, 11/17/24, 11/21/24, 11/23/24, 11/27/24, 11/28/24, 11/30/24, and 12/31/24) of 8 days reviewed. The facility failed to submit accurate licensed nurse hours for 11/16/24, 11/17/24, 11/21/24, 11/23/24, 11/27/24, 11/28/24, 11/30/24, and 12/31/24. The facility's failure could place residents at risk for personal needs not being identified and met, decreased quality of care, decline in health status, and decreased feelings of well-being within their living environment. Findings included: Review of the CMS PBJ report for CMS for FY Quarter 1 2024 (October 1- December 21) indicated the facility had failed to have Licensed Nursing Coverage 24…

    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.

    Administration 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

$16,437 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $16,437 — penalty dated 2025-09-03

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

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 1 of 52.3-1.3 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 52.4-0.4 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 51.8-0.8 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 53.6-0.6 vs chain
The other 115 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.3★, per CMS)
1 of 5Avir At BanderaBandera, TX 1 of 5Avir At Cowhorn CreekTexarkana, TX 1 of 5Avir At DallasDallas, TX 1 of 5Avir At LindaleLindale, TX 1 of 5Avir At StephenvilleStephenville, TX 1 of 5Avir at AdamsTemple, TX 1 of 5Avir at Arbor TerraceSan Angelo, TX 1 of 5Avir at BeaumontBeaumont, TX 1 of 5Avir at BeltonBelton, TX 1 of 5Avir at BoerneBoerne, TX 1 of 5Avir at BradburnGrand Saline, TX 1 of 5Avir at CaldwellCaldwell, TX 1 of 5Avir at Camp WoodCamp Wood, TX 1 of 5Avir at Citizens TrailTexarkana, TX 1 of 5Avir at ConverseConverse, TX 1 of 5Avir at GainesvilleGainesville, TX 1 of 5Avir at GarlandGarland, TX 1 of 5Avir at GiddingsGiddings, TX 1 of 5Avir at Heritage OaksLubbock, TX 1 of 5Avir at HillsboroHillsboro, TX 1 of 5Avir at HoustonHouston, TX 1 of 5Avir at Johnson CityJohnson City, TX 1 of 5Avir at KerrvilleKerrville, TX 1 of 5Avir at LongviewLongview, TX 1 of 5Avir at LubbockLubbock, TX 1 of 5Avir at Meadow CreekSan Angelo, TX 1 of 5Avir at MineolaMineola, TX 1 of 5Avir at New BraunfelsNew Braunfels, TX 1 of 5Avir at PatriotEl Paso, TX 1 of 5Avir at PortlandPortland, TX 1 of 5Avir at Rose TrailTyler, TX 1 of 5Avir at San AngeloSan Angelo, TX 1 of 5Avir at SeguinSeguin, TX 1 of 5Avir at TexarkanaTexarkana, TX 1 of 5Avir at Tierra EsteEl Paso, TX 1 of 5Avir at Veterans MemorialHouston, TX 1 of 5Avir at WestonTemple, TX 1 of 5Avir at WinnsboroWinnsboro, TX 1 of 5Avir at WoodlandsEastland, TX 1 of 5Brightpointe at Lytle LakeAbilene, TX

Showing 40 of 115; lowest-rated first.

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
413 MANSFIELD CARDINAL RD HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 09/01/2025
ANA TX HOLDINGS, LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 09/01/2025
GRAF HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 09/01/2025
TX SNF HOLDINGS II LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 09/01/2025
TX SNF HOLDINGS MEMBER, LLCOrganizationINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 09/01/2025
DAGAN, AMITAIIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 09/01/2025
FREUND, NOCHUMIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/01/2025
GOLDBERGER, ABRAHAMIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 09/01/2025
GOLDBERGER, FAIGYIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTsince 09/01/2025
TRAVITSKY, AARONIndividualINDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/01/2025
413 MANSFIELD CARDINAL RD PROPERTY OWNER LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2025
WELLTOWER INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2025
WELLTOWER NNN GROUP, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2025
WELLTOWER OP, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2025
DAY, ZARAHIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2025
SILAT, NOOMANIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 18 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

9 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.

$3.2M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+7.2%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$184K
Related-party expense6% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 78%Medicare 7%Other / private 15%

About 78% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $184K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

$226per resident / day
operating cost
$6,866per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$243per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

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 675270. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-03, 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