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

Rosewood Heights

5700 E Central Texas Expwy, Killeen, TX 76543 · For profit - Corporation · 64 certified beds · (254) 690-6169 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
2 immediate-jeopardy citations1 immediate-jeopardy citation CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$42,298 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
Worth asking about
  • inspectors cited 2 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
  • inspectors recorded 1 serious finding 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 (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $42,298 in federal fines (most recent 2026-04-17)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (68%) 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.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1001 East Veterans Memorial Boulevard, Midtown Mall, Suite 400
Pharmacy
1639 Ward Road
Grocery
418 N 10th St · (254) 526-2244 · Call to confirm hours
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1001 E Veterans Memorial Blvd · (254) 618-5433

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 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 3 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 rating3★
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 increased10.5%15.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.8%3.0%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.3%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%0.8%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms9.2%2.4%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.9%3.3%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened3.3%14.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication9.6%18.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.6%3.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control14.7%13.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table3.2%9.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.4%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine89.3%88.0%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission29.6%25.7%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit18.2%12.3%12.0%worse

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.

64.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 148 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

64.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
8.5%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
43.1%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.18U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.10hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 43.1% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 51 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 19% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 47% 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 SNF64.2%CMS range 55.6–72.851.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF8.5%CMS range 5.5–12.510.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge43.1%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge45.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge33.3%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified97.1%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this 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 discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.9%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.9%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.5%CMS range 4.9–12.07.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.941.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

0.40
RN hours/ resident / day
1.24
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.18
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.81
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.32
RN hoursweekends
67.6%
Total nursing turnover
75.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 64 beds and averages 58.9 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 5 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.81 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.40 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.18 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.37 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.99 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.43 to 0.32 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 68% is well above the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-08-14)
1
at the previous standard inspection (2024-07-11)

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.

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

  • Immediate jeopardy · J2025-04-18 · tag F0655 — isolated
    Create and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
    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 develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that includes the instructions needed to provide effective person-centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality of care within 48 hours of a resident's admission including the minimum healthcare information necessary to properly care for one (Resident #1) of five residents reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan with interventions within 48 hours of admission for Resident #1 that addressed her high fall risk status. The facility failed to complete an admission assessment and baseline care planning, and ensure staff had adequate knowledge and access to care plans. The facility failed to ensure effective use of the [NAME] system as a reference tool by failing to ensure adequate staff knowledge in the updating and referencing of the [NAME]. Resident #1 fell from her wheelchair on 03/29/25 and…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2025-04-18 · 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 interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for one (Resident #1) of five residents reviewed for accidents and supervision. The facility failed to ensure staff implemented Resident #1's hospital discharge order upon admission to be placed on fall precautions. The facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan with interventions within 48 hours of admission for Resident #1 that addressed her high fall risk status. The facility failed to complete an admission assessment and baseline care planning, and ensure staff had adequate knowledge and access to care plans. The facility failed to ensure effective use of the [NAME] system as a reference tool by failing to ensure adequate staff knowledge in the updating and referencing of the [NAME]. On 03/29/2025 Resident #1 was left unsupervised in her room which resulted in a fall from her wheelchair where she hit her head resulting in pain and nystagmus and was admitted 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-07-30 · 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 residents with pressure ulcers receive necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for treatment of pressure ulcers. The facility failed to recognize and provide treatment, and prevention measure for an open skin area on Resident #1. The area was first noted on 6/25/24 with admission, the first documentation of care being provided to the area was on 7/7/24. On 7/10/24 Resident #1 was diagnosed with a stage III pressure injury (a full thickness loss of skin extending to the subcutaneous tissue). The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The IJ began on 06/25/24 and ended on 07/26/24. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place residents at increased risk of a wound infection and delay the healing process. Findings included: 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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Actual harm · Gcited before2026-04-17 · 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 provide care, consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent pressure injuries for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 residents reviewed for pressure injuries. The facility failed to prevent Resident #1 from receiving a shear to her right buttock, which ultimately became a stage 4 pressure ulcer that developed into sepsis (life-threatening condition caused by the body's extreme and dysregulated response to an infection, leading to organ dysfunction and potentially death) due to wound infection, infection due to polymicrobial wound flora, and osteomyelitis (infection that happens when bacteria or fungi infect the bone marrow) of sacrococcygeal wound. This failure placed residents at risk of developing pressure injuries, wound infections, and pain. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's comprehensive MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of: stroke, kidney…

    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
  • Actual harm · G2023-06-02 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolated
    Provide safe, appropriate pain management 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 that pain management is provided to resident who require such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #24) reviewed for pain management. The facility failed to administer pain medication to Resident #24 on 06/02/23, resulting in prolonged pain for the resident. This failure could result in worsening of pain and injury to residents. The findings were as follows: Review of the face sheet for Resident #24 dated 06/02/23 reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Transient Cerebral Ischemic Attack (stroke), Hypertension (High blood pressure), Weakness, Pain in right shoulder, Need for assistance with personal care, Unspecified abnormalities of gait and mobility, Unspecified mononeuropathy (nerve damage that are not of brain and spinal cord) of left 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-08-14 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to update periodically and follow menus in accordance with professional standards for 3 of 3 meals served. 1. The facility failed to update the facility menu since Fall/Winter 2024.2. The facility failed to follow the menu for week 5 of the Fall/Winter 2024. These failures could place residents at risk for weight loss, decreased nutritional intake, loss of desire, interest, and satisfaction in meals.Record Review on 8/12/2025 at 10:30 AM of Fall/Winter 2024 menus provided by facility revealed the following: Week 5, Day 31, Tuesday, lunch: Beef stew, mashed potatoes, mixed green salad, wheat bread, and baked apple slices.Week 5, Day 32, Wednesday, lunch: Lemon Pepper Chicken, lima beans, brussels sprouts, wheat bread, and chocolate tart.Week 5, Day 33, Thursday, lunch: Swedish meatballs, parsley noodles, roasted broccoli, wheat roll, and chilled fruit cup.Observation on 8/12/2025 at approximately 12:45 PM of test tray reflected a bowl of…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-08-14 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for Food and Nutrition Services. 1. The facility failed to ensure that expired foods were discarded.2. The facility failed to ensure food items were labeled and dated.3. The facility failed to ensure that serving utensils and dishes were not stored in a clean area.These failures could place residents at risk for foodborne illness.Observation on 8/12/2025 at 8:30 AM of the walk-in refrigerator reflected the following:- Lemons in a black container with no date had mold on them.- Raspberries dated 8/4/2025 on the box in their original container were molded.- Bell Peppers in a black container with no date had mold on them.- Grapes in a box dated 7/11 were in their original bag and had mold on them.- Half a squash wrapped in plastic was undated.Observation on 8/12/2025 at 8:30 AM of the pantry reflected the following:- hot dog buns had an expiration date of 5/11/2025.- Tortillas had expiration date of…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-10-02 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, which are complete and accurately documented for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for documentation. 1-Resident #1's September 2024 MAR was documented inaccurately. Staff documented the resident received 2 enteral feedings at the same time. 2- Resident #1's weight record documentation was incomplete. Staff failed to document an admission weight, failed to document a weight on Wednesday as ordered by the physician, and failed to ensure documented weights were accurate. The RD assessment was incomplete with no weight documented. 3-Resident #1's September 2024 TAR documentation was incomplete. Staff did not document or sign off on the cleaning the j-tube, monitoring surgical site for infection, and cleaning skin tear to right arm. These failures could result in inaccurate records, errors in care, decline in health and quality of life. Findings included: 1.…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-09 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for one of five residents (Resident #1) reviewed for medications. The facility failed to remove Resident #1 discontinued order Of Labetalol HCL 300 MG from the med cart. This failure could place residents at risk for irregular heartbeat, low blood pressure, rapid or slow heartbeat, and lightheadedness. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's, undated, face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included diabetes (pancreas not producing enough insulin) and Essential Primary Hypertension (high blood pressure). Record review of Resident #1's care plan initiated 08/21/2024 and revised 09/06/2024 reflected Resident #1 had diabetes and was at risk for complications associated…

    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 · D2024-09-09 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
    Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of any significant medication errors for one of five residents (Resident #1) reviewed for medications. The facility failed to remove Resident #1 discontinued order Of Labetalol HCL 300 MG from the med cart. This failure resulted in Med Tech A preparing to give and having to be stopped by LVN B from administering an additional 600 mg of Labetalol on 09/04/2024 that had been discontinued on 08/30/2024. This failure could place residents at risk for irregular heartbeat, low blood pressure, rapid or slow heartbeat, and lightheadedness. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's, undated, face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included diabetes (pancreas not producing enough insulin) and Essential Primary Hypertension (high blood pressure). Record review of Resident #1's care plan initiated 08/21/2024 and revised 09/06/2024 reflected Resident #1…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-07-11 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive care plan to meet the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of 1 (Resident #17) of 4 residents reviewed for care plans The facility failed to update the comprehensive person-centered care plan for Resident #17's transfer status for use of the Mechanical lift. This failure could place residents of risk for not receiving appropriate care and treatment, falls, and injury related to improper transfer. Findings included: Record review of Resident #17's undated face sheet reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis of arteriosclerotic heart disease (narrowing of the arteries), unspecified abnormality of gait, weakness, depression, and hypertension (elevated blood pressure). Record review of Resident #17's admission MDS dated [DATE] reflected he had a BIMS score of 7 indicating he had severe cognitive impairment. Resident #17 required…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-10-02 · 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 review and revise the person-centered care plan to reflect the current condition for 1 resident (Resident #1) of 8 residents reviewed for care plan accuracy. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's care plan was updated to reflect a diabetic foot ulcer and treatment. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving appropriate interventions to meet their current needs. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's undated face sheet printed 09/30/23 reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including type 2 diabetes(condition in the way the body regulates and uses sugar as a fuel), chronic kidney disease stage 3(loss of function in the kidneys), osteoarthritis(wear down of protective tissue), and hyperlipidemia(excess fat in the blood). Record review of Resident #1's undated care plan reflected that Resident #1 did not have a care plan for wound care treatment. 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-06-02 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — pattern
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure respiratory care was provided consistent with professional standards of practice for 4 of 4 residents (Resident #10, Resident #20, Resident #200, and Resident #202) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #202's 02 tubing and humidifier were dated. The facility failed to ensure Resident #10's, Resident 20's, and Resident #200's 02 tubing and humidifier were changed every 7 days on a Sunday. These failures could place all residents who use respiratory equipment at risk for respiratory infections. Findings included: Record review of Resident #10's 06/01/2023 face Sheet reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of unspecified dementia, unspecified severity with other behavioral disturbance, major depressive disorder, recurrent, unspecified, acute kidney failure, unspecified, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, unspecified, chronic respiratory failure…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-06-02 · 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 interview, and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for Pain Management. (Resident #24) The facility failed to provide Resident #24 pain medication Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen Tablet 5-325 MG and Gabapentin Oral Capsule 300 MG as ordered. This failure placed the resident at risk of increased pain, poor sleep patterns, increased anxiety and depression, and decreased sense of wellbeing. Findings included: Review of the face sheet for Resident #24 dated 07/28/23 reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Transient Cerebral Ischemic Attack (stroke), Hypertension (High blood pressure), Weakness, Pain in right shoulder, Need for assistance with personal care, Unspecified abnormalities of gait and mobility, Unspecified mononeuropathy (nerve damage…

    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 · D2023-06-02 · 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 and prevention control program that included, at a minimum, a system for preventing and controlling infections for 2 of 6 residents reviewed for the usage of Blood Pressure Monitors (Resident #45, Resident #202). The facility failed to ensure LVN A disinfected the blood pressure monitor between Resident#45 and Resident #202. This failure could place the residents at risk for cross contamination and infection. Findings included: Review of Resident #202's face sheet dated 06/01/23reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female and was admitted to the facility on [DATE].The diagnoses included Abdominal pain, Nausea with vomiting, Hypokalemia ( Low potassium level in blood), Rectal abscess, Generalized Anxiety disorder, Hypertension (High Blood pressure), Parkinson's disease, Seasonal allergy, Hyperlipidemia ( High level of fat in Blood), Kidney failure, Dementia, Psychotic disturbance, Mood disturbance, Restless legs…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

$42,298 in federal fines across 3 penalties.

  • $16,350 — penalty dated 2026-04-17
  • $9,193 — penalty dated 2025-04-18
  • $16,755 — penalty dated 2024-07-11

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 TOUCHSTONE COMMUNITIES — 25 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 3 of 52.9+0.1 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 53.0≈ chain avg
Staffing 2 of 51.7+0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.0≈ chain avg
The other 24 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)

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

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
KEYBANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATIONOrganization5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTERESTsince 05/01/2024
INTERNATIONAL BANK OF COMMERCEOrganization5% OR GREATER SECURITY INTERESTsince 05/01/2024
APOLINAR, ADAMIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 08/01/2015
TOUCHSTONE STRATEGIES - KILLEEN LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
BOENING, CHRISTOPHERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
CAMPBELL, LESLIEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
CASTILLO, LYNNEAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
LANDERS, LISAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
SEHLKE, BRYONIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
ZUROVEC, DARRELLIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
FELLBAUM, ERNESTIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/29/2025
FELLBAUM, KELLYIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/29/2025
STUDER, LAURAIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/29/2025
STUDER, STANLEYIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 08/29/2025
AEGIS THERAPIES, INC.OrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
ALAMO ADVISORS LPOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
CARVAJAL PHARMACY LTCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
FELLBAUM 2023 DESCENDANTS TRUSTOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
HC-RW ASSOCIATES, LTD.OrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
HEALTHCARE INVESTMENTS - KILLEEN LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
HEALTHCARE SERVICES GROUP INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
JAN STUDER 2023 SPOUSAL TRUSTOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
KELLY FELLBAUM 2023 SPOUSAL TRUSTOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
PLANTE & MORAN PLLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
STUDER 2023 DESCENDANTS TRUSTOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
THE BRYON AND RENA SEHLKE LIVING TRUSTOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
TOUCHSTONE COMMUNITIES INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
TRIDENT HEALTH SERVICES INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2024
OOMMEN, BIJUIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 12/01/2024
PALO, DEBBIEIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 09/30/2024

CMS files one row per role, so the 37 rows in the source record cover these 30 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.

17 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.

$6.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-12.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 48%Medicare 14%Other / private 38%

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 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$375per resident / day
operating cost
$11,398per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$333per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in TX

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 455503. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-14, 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