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

Brazos Healthcare Center

413 Garland Dr, Lake Jackson, TX 77566 · For profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (979) 297-3266 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (979) 297-3266 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 14 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record

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) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
120 Flag Lake Dr · (979) 299-6900 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
51 Dixie Dr · (979) 265-2517 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
708 Dixie Dr · (979) 297-5550 · Call to confirm hours
Park
328 Garland Dr · (979) 297-4533 · 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
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 2 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 fell from 4 to 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 increased14.1%15.8%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight5.5%3.0%5.4%typical
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.3%0.3%0.9%typical for the 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 symptoms0.0%2.4%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained3.2%0.0%0.1%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury7.4%3.3%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened11.6%14.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication16.2%18.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.8%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.8%3.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control8.0%13.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table14.2%9.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.7%1.5%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine54.5%88.0%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission28.2%25.7%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit8.8%12.3%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days3.372.171.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.172.061.80worse

* 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.

0.26U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.11hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.11hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.03hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.26 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 37% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 12% 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 identified87.5%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 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 stay0.0%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 worsened12.5%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 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 SNFs1.091.02Oct 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

0.28
RN hours/ resident / day
1.15
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.52
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.95
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.28
RN hoursweekends
54.8%
Total nursing turnover
66.7%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 51.3 residents a day — about 43% occupied, or roughly 69 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.95 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.28 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.52 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.43 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.15 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.28 to 0.28 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 55% is about the same as 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

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-07-02)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-05-28)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

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

  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-23 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment including but not limited to receiving treatment and support for daily living safely for 3 of 3 shower rooms (A-Hall, B-Hall, and C-Hall) reviewed for cleanliness and sanitization.The facility failed to maintain clean and organized shower rooms, maintenance leaking shower head faucet, and properly dispose of dirty briefs and used linen.These deficient practices could place residents at risk of living in an unclean and unsanitary environment which could lead to a decreased quality of life.Findings included: During an observation on 12/19/2025 at 01:12 p.m.in unlocked shower room A-Hall (across from the nurse's station) had leaking water dripping from shower head faucets. Floor and wall tiles were discolored under leaking water. During an observation on 12/19/2025 at 01:14 p.m. in unlocked shower room on B-Hall (resident's hall) were 2-open wall cabinets that were full of unorganized items consisting of loose gloves, unfolded towels, 1 of 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-12-23 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — pattern
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range and electrolyte balance, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrated that it was not possible or resident preferences indicated otherwise for 1 (Resident #1) of 6 residents reviewed for weight loss: The facility failed to provide weekly weights for Resident #1 on 10/27/2025, 11/10/2025, 11/17/2025, 11/24/2025, 12/08/2025, and 12/15/2025. Resident #1 was noted to have weight loss on 12/01/2025 and 12/17/2025 who had gastrostomy status (refers to a patient having a surgically placed tube (G-tube) into their stomach for feeding or draining, requiring ongoing care) diagnosis. These failures had the potential to affect other residents requiring weight management, especially those who have weight loss and weight gain and who could be at risk of serious harm due to poor nutrition and weight loss. Findings Included: Record review…

    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 · E2025-12-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    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 3 of 3 shower rooms (A-Hall, B-Hall, and C-Hall) observed for infection control practices.The facility failed to maintain clean and organized shower rooms and avoid the development of legionella (a serious lung infection (pneumonia) caused by a bacteria, caught by inhaling mist from contaminated warm water sources like cooling towels and showers), repairing a leaking shower faucet, and not properly disposing of dirty briefs and linen. This failure could place residents at risk of cross-contamination from exposure to another's used personal items.Findings included: During an observation on 12/19/2025 at 01:12 p.m. of A-Hall's unlocked shower room (across from the nurse's station) faucet water dripping from 1 of 1 shower heads. Water accumulating on discolored floor and wall tiles near drip water.…

    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 · D2025-11-26 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission for each resident that includes instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality care for 1 (CR#1) of 1 resident reviewed for baseline care plans. -CR#1 was admitted on [DATE] and his baseline care plan was not completed until 8/19/2025. This failure could lead to residents not receiving necessary care timely and decreased quality of life. Findings include:Record review of CR#1 admission record dated 8/8/2025 revealed an [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] at 5:30 pm and was discharged on 8/12/2025. His diagnoses included: Left intertrochanteric femur fracture (left hip fracture), metabolic encephalopathy (refers to change in brain function due to metabolic disturbances in the body), chronic kidney disease 4 with acute kidney injury now with end stage renal disease (gradual kidney damage with a sudden…

    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 · F2025-07-02 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — widespread
    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 and provide separately locked, permanently affixed compartments for storage of controlled drugs listed in Schedule II of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1976 for 54 of 54 residents in that: Facility failed to ensure Emergency Narcotic Kit kept in the facility medication room was permanently affixed. This failure could place residents at risk for misappropriation of property, and exploitation related to drug diversion. Findings: Observation and interview with ADON on [DATE] at 10:19 am of facility's only medication room that was key locked and secured, located behind the nursing station desk of B hall/unit. There was a small approximately 10X10X10 bright red metal box with a keypad coded front, which was closed and sealed, located on an upper cabinet shelf. The box had 2 small holes on the back side of the box and a red sticker tag labeled Brazos. Another side of the box had a sticker labeled with Pharmacy…

    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 · F2025-07-02 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    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, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen, in that: - The facility failed to ensure the tabletop can opener blade and base were free of grime and debris.- The facility failed to ensure that the 3-compartment sink with wash-water and sanitizing solution was not used for food preparation.- The facility failed to label, and date left over food items in the refrigerator\freezer.- The facility failed to ensure that dented can goods were stored away from undented can goods. These failures could place residents at risk for food contamination and foodborne illness. Findings included: Observation and interview on 06/30/25 beginning at 8:30 AM revealed the following:-One of one can opener in the kitchen had dark brownish looking substance around the cutting blade and the blade holder. The Dietary Manager took it out for wash.-Observation of one of one Deep fryer revealed it was 3\4 filled dark looking grease and whitish floating…

    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 · D2025-07-02 · tag F0636 — isolated
    Assess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
    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 record review and interviews the facility failed to conduct a comprehensive assessment, within 14 calendar days after admission, for 2 of 13 residents (Resident #8 and resident #156) reviewed for comprehensive annual assessments and transmitted MDS data to the CMS System. The facility failed to complete Resident #8's admission MDS assessment within 14 days of admission. The facility failed to complete Resident #156's admission MDS assessment within 14 days of admission. This failure could place residents at risk of not having their assessments completed and transmitted timely which could result in a delay in treatment, denial of payment and or resident services. The findings included: Record review of Resident #8's face sheet dated 07/02/25 revealed a -[AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included cerebral palsy, (a group of neurological disorders that appear in infancy and permanently affect body movement and muscle coordination.), abnormalities of gait and mobility,…

    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 · D2025-07-02 · 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a comprehensive care plan was reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment, including both the comprehensive and quarterly review assessments for 1 of 20 residents (Resident #41) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to revise Resident #41's comprehensive care plan to reflect the resident's discontinued catheter use. This failure could place resident at risk of isolation and not receiving needed care and services to improve their health. The findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #41's face sheet dated 07/02/25 revealed a-[AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included: Essential (primary) hypertension (High blood pressure), major depressive disorder), morbid obesity due to excess calories, retention of urine, type 2 diabetes (A chronic condition characterized by insulin resistance and elevated blood sugar levels). intertrochanteric fracture of left femur,…

    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 · Ecited before2024-06-30 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for 17 of 39 residents reviewed for environmental concerns in that: The facility failed to provide hot running water in the bathrooms for 17 residents assigned to A-Hall for over a month. The facility failed to keep a safe and sanitary environment due to black substance being found in 3 of 39 resident's rooms. This failure placed residents at risk of living in an unsafe, unsanitary, and uncomfortable environment and could potentially cause a decline in their health. Findings included: Observation on 06/30/2024 at 12:44p.m., revealed black substance around the sprinkler head in room [ROOM NUMBER]. Observation on 6/30/2024 at 1:13p.m., revealed black substance around the sprinkler head in room [ROOM NUMBER]. Observation on 6/30/2024 at 1:16p.m., revealed a broken water heater. During an interview on 6/30/2024 at 1:17p.m. with the Floor Tech, he said the water pipe was out 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-05-28 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — pattern
    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 ACT - Actuation BIMS - Brief Interview for Mental Status EMR - Electronic Medical Record DON - Director of Nursing LVN - License Vocational Nurse MA - Medication Aide MAR - Medication Administration Record MCG - Microgram MDS - Minimum Data Set Q - Quarterly RAI - =Resident Assessment Instrument S/S= E Surveyor Name(s): [NAME] Immediate Supervisor: [NAME] Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident's drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #23) reviewed for unnecessary medications. -Facility failed to give Resident #23's Midodrine 10 mg medication as ordered by the physician. -The facility failed to check the resident's SBP level before administering Resident #23 her Midodrine 10mg medication. This deficient practice could place residents in the facility at risk of having the use of an unnecessary drug without adequate indications for its use, and a decline in their health. Findings include: Record review of Resident #23's…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-28 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure assessment accurately reflects the resident's status for 1 (Resident #9) of 13 residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments, in that -The facility failed to ensure Resident #9's Quarterly MDS assessment accurately reflected her bowel and bladder status. This failure could place residents at risk for inadequate care, diminished quality of life and decline in health. Findings include: Record review of Resident #9's admission Record revealed she was an [AGE] year old female that readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of hyperlipidemia (high cholesterol), dysphagia (difficulty or discomfort in swallowing), bipolar disorder (a condition associated with episodes of mood swings ranging from depressive lows and manic highs), and epilepsy (a disorder in which nerve cell activity in the brain is disturbed causing seizures and can be genetic or as a result of injury). Her BIMS score was 15 out of 15 indicating she had no cognitive…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-28 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate of less than 5%. There were 2 errors out of 30 opportunities which resulted in a 6% error rate involving 2 of 3 residents (Resident #12, and Resident #20) and 1 of 2 employees (MA A) observed during medication administration reviewed for medication error , in that: -MA A omitted Resident #12's Bismuth/[NAME] pectate anti diarrheal medication. -MA A gave Resident #20 an incorrect dose of her nasal spray. These failures could affect residents and put them at risk for not receiving the intended therapeutic benefit of their medication and or adverse outcomes. The findings were: Resident #12 Record review of Resident #12's admission Record revealed she was a [AGE] year old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the following diagnoses: diarrhea (a condition of having loose, watery stools, three or more times in a day, or more frequently than usual for the individual), dementia (a condition…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-04-06 · 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 develop and implement a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and time frames to meet, attain, and/or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for two (Residents #16 and #22) of fifteen residents reviewed for care plans. 1) The facility failed to ensure Resident #22's careplan addressed his tracheostomy, oxygen use or need for suctioning. 2) The facility failed to ensure Resident #16's careplan addressed her oxygen use. This failure could negatively impact the resident's quality of life, as well as the quality of care and services received if care planning is not complete or is inadequate. 1) Review of Resident #22's admission Record dated 04/06/23 revealed a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #22 had diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic respiratory failure, bacterial pneumonia, heart…

    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 · D2023-04-06 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who needed respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning, was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, the residents' goals and preferences for one of two residents (Resident #16) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #16's oxygen tubing was changed weekly per physician's orders. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for respiratory infections. Findings included: Review of Resident #16's face sheet, dated 04/06/2023, reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted on [DATE] with an original admission date of 05/20/2020, with diagnoses that included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, mild intermittent asthma, and congestive heart failure. Review of Resident #16's Annual MDS dated [DATE] reflected a BIMS score of 13, which indicated the resident's cognition was intact.…

    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

“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

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
KIRLEY, FRANCISIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/31/2023
FOSTER, PATTIIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/27/2014
NICHOLS, MASONIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/27/2014
SWIFT, SCOTTIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/26/2015
WEEKS, VIOLETIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 09/24/2013
PARK, KELLYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 08/01/2019
NEXION HEALTH AT BRAZOS INCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 03/31/2023

CMS files one row per role, so the 8 rows in the source record cover these 7 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.

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$3.6M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+5.0%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 85%Medicare 6%Other / private 9%

About 85% 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.

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

$233per resident / day
operating cost
$7,077per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$245per 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 455477. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-02, 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