McGregor Wellness & Rehabilitation
414 Johnson Dr, Mc Gregor, TX 76657 · Government - Hospital district · 186 certified beds · (254) 840-3281 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- inspectors cited 6 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
- a high number of inspection citations overall (19) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $49,443 in federal fines (most recent 2024-04-15)
- its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (100%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 1 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 4 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 13.8% | 15.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 0.0% | 3.0% | 5.4% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.4% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.4% | 2.4% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 3.8% | 3.3% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 10.4% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 22.7% | 18.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.5% | 3.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 22.6% | 13.4% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 18.1% | 9.6% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 5.3% | 1.5% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 88.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.88 | 2.17 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.44 | 2.06 | 1.80 | worse |
* 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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 47% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 48% 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
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not 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 SNF | 11.5%CMS range 7.6–17.1 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not 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 SNFs | 1.53 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 186 beds and averages 56.5 residents a day — about 30% occupied, or roughly 130 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 3.72 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.77 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.26 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 3.39 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.86 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.86 to 0.56 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 100% is well above the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
19 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2025-06-25 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect 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 interviews and record reviews the facility to immediately inform the resident; consult with the resident's physician; and notify, consistent with his or her authority, the resident representative(s) when there is a significant change in the resident's physical status for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 residents reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure the MD and Hospice were notified when Resident #1 had a change of condition on [DATE] with blood in his foley catheter (a medical device, a thin flexible, sterile tube that is inserted through the urethra into the bladder to drain urine). Resident #1 was sent to the ER on [DATE] for further evaluation and treatment and was diagnosed with Sepsis (a serious condition in which the body responds improperly to an infection, causing organ damage and sometimes death) without acute organ dysfunction, Acute urinary retention (a sudden and often painful inability to empty the bladder, which can develop rapidly and may require immediate medical attention.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2025-06-25 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who is incontinent of bladder receives appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents review for catheter care. The facility failed to assess and intervene with Resident #1's foley catheter (a medical device, a thin flexible, sterile tube that is inserted through the urethra into the bladder to drain urine) when Resident #1's foley catheter was draining all blood from [DATE] until 3 days later on [DATE]; Resident #1 was sent to the local ER for further evaluation and treatment and was diagnosed with Sepsis (a serious condition in which the body responds improperly to an infection, causing organ damage and sometimes death) without acute organ dysfunction dated [DATE], Acute urinary retention (a sudden and often painful inability to empty the bladder, which can develop rapidly and may require immediate medical attention. Symptoms may include suprapubic pain, bloating,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2025-06-25 · tag F0697 — failed to manage pain — isolatedProvide 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 interview and records review, the facility failed to ensure that pain management was provided to residents who require such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents review for pain management. The facility failed to provide effective pain interventions for Resident #1 from [DATE] through [DATE]. The facility failed to assess and intervene when Resident #1's foley catheter (a medical device, a thin flexible, sterile tube that is inserted through the urethra into the bladder to drain urine) when Resident #1's foley catheter was draining all blood from [DATE] until 3 days later on [DATE]; Resident #1 was sent to the local ER for further evaluation and treatment and was diagnosed with Sepsis (a serious condition in which the body responds improperly to an infection, causing organ damage and sometimes death) without acute organ dysfunction dated [DATE], Acute urinary…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Immediate jeopardy · K2024-04-15 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2 and Resident #3 ) of 14 residents reviewed for accident hazards/supervision. There was one staff member in the memory care unit of the facility supervising 14 residents by herself., limiting adequate supervision for preventing accidents. An IJ was identified on 04/12/24. The IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 6:00PM. While the IJ was removed on 04/15/24, the facility remained out of compliance at a scope of pattern and a severity level of no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is not immediate jeopardy, due to the facility continuing to monitor the implementation and effectiveness of the corrective systems. This failure could affect all the memory care residents and place them at risk of not receiving the appropriate level of supervision to prevent physical harm, pain 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · K2023-12-04 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide 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 accurate acquiring, and administering of all drugs and biologicals to meet the needs for 1 (Resident#1) of 8 resident reviewed for pharmaceutical services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's scheduled medications were acquired and administered. Resident #1 was not given Acyclovir for a total of 8 times, one post-dialysis dose of 400 MG on 10/16/2023, and seven 200 MG doses from 10/31/2023 through 11/05/2023. Resident #1 was not given Trifluridine a total of 59 times from 7/23/2023 through 11/28/2023, with 22 of the 59 missed Trifluridine doses having been missed in the month of November 2023. This failure resulted in the Resident #1's eye infection not healing effectively, and Resident #1 being considered for corneal transplant. An IJ was identified on 12/01/2023. The IJ Template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 04:17 p.m. While the IJ was removed on 12/04/2023, the facility remained 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · K2023-12-04 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — patternEnsure 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 significant medication errors for 1 (Resident#1) of 8 resident reviewed for pharmaceutical services. The facility failed to follow prescribers' orders and professional standards and principles which apply to professionals providing services for Resident #1's scheduled medications. Resident #1 was not given Acyclovir for a total of 8 times, one post-dialysis dose of 400 MG on 10/16/2023, and seven 200 MG doses from 10/31/2023 through 11/05/2023. Resident #1 was not given Trifluridine a total of 59 times from 7/23/2023 through 11/28/2023, with 22 of the 59 missed Trifluridine doses having been missed in the month of November 2023. This failure resulted in the Resident #1's eye infection not healing effectively, and Resident #1 being considered for corneal transplant. An IJ was identified on 12/01/2023. The IJ Template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 04:17 p.m. While the IJ was removed on 12/04/2023, the facility…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-03-12 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the 1-of-1 of kitchen. 1. The facility failed to ensure food items were labeled and/or dated. 2. The facility failed to ensure food items were correctly sealed. 3. The facility failed to ensure food items were properly thawed. 4. The facility failed to ensure food items were not stacked on the floor. 5. The facility failed to ensure food temperatures were taken before serving residents meals. These failures could place residents who received meals from the main kitchen at risk for foodborne illnesses.Findings include: Observation on 3/10/2026 at 8:40 AM of the walk-in cooler revealed the following:A container of white gravy was labeled with a date of 3/9 only with no expiration date.A Ziploc bag of chicken nuggets had no date on the bag.Opened butter wrapped in Saran Wrap had no open date or expiration date.A container of sweet corn was dated only 2/9.A bag of herbs was not sealed and had no opening or…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-03-12 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4 was coded in the MDS for pressure ulcer (injuries to the skin and the tissue below the skin that are due to pressure on the skin for a long time). This failure could place residents at risk for receiving inadequate care and services based on an inaccurate assessment.The findings include: Record review of Resident #4's face sheet, dated 03/12/2026, reflected an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with an initial admit date of 05/15/2025. Resident #4's Pertinent diagnoses included: type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications (a person has diabetes, but it has not yet led to any additional health problems or complications), hypokalemia (a medical condition characterized by abnormally low levels of potassium in the blood), hyperlipidemia,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-01-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure 3 of 3 staff (the KD, CO B and CO C) prepared, distributed and served food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety when reviewed for food procurement, store/prepare/serve-sanitary. The KD, CO B and CO C were observed with exposed mustaches while preparing lunch and handling food. The KD and CO B were observed touching multiple surfaces (food, clothing, books, cellphones) without changing their gloves.Findings included: Observation on 01/06/25 at 11:05 AM revealed the KD, CO A and CO B wearing face coverings that did not cover their mustaches while preparing lunch. Observation also revealed the KD and CO A touching multiple surfaces (clothing, cell phone, books) and preparing lunch while wearing gloves and did not change them. In an interview with the KD on 01/06/26 at 11:05 AM, he stated the policy on hair restraints reflected staff was to have no visible hair exposed. He stated facial hair was also included. The KD stated hair falling in the food was a risk that led to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-08-07 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident had the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodations of resident needs and preferences except when to do so would endanger the health or safety of the resident or other residents for 2 of 5 residents (Residents #1 & #2) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 and #2's call lights were within reach on 08/07/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of their needs not being met. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's admission record, dated 08/07/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included: cerebrovascular disease (a condition that affect blood flow to the brain), type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications (a condition where the body either doesn't produce enough insulin or can't properly use the insulin it makes causing blood sugar levels to become too…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-07 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for comprehensive care plans Resident #3's comprehensive care plan did not reflect Resident #3 had fallen on 07/12/25 and 07/29/25. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for not receiving proper care and services due to inaccurate care plans. Findings include: Record review of Resident #3's admission record, dated 08/07/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #3 had diagnoses which included: vascular dementia (type of dementia caused by impaired blood flow to the brain, leading to brain cell damage and cognitive decline), depression (mental health…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-12-11 · tag F0638 — patternAssure that each resident’s assessment is updated at least once every 3 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 interview and record review the facility failed to assess a resident using the quarterly review instrument specified by the State and approved by CMS not less frequently than once every 3 months for 4 of 5 Residents (Resident #21, Resident #55, Resident #56, and Resident #58) reviewed for assessments. The facility failed to complete a quarterly assessment for Residents #21, #55, #56, and #58 every 3 months. This failure could place residents at risk for not getting an accurate assessment and could result in lack of care. Findings include: Resident #21 Review of Resident #21's electronic face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses to include: Cerebrovascular disease ( conditions that affect the blood vessels and blood flow in the brain and spinal cord), Hypertension (pressure of the blood in your blood vessels is consistently too high), Anxiety Disorder, Unspecified ( someone who experiences anxiety or phobias that are significant but don't meet the criteria for a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-12-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews and record 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 reviewed for kitchen sanitation in that: - Food items were not labeled and/or dated. Some food items that were labeled were out date. These failures could place all residents who received meals from the main kitchen at risk for food borne illness. Findings include: Observation on 12/09/2024 at 7:15 am of the pantry reflected the following: The dried pantry had food that was not dated and some food that was out of date, - Baking soda that had an expiration date of was dated 8-23-24. Observation on 12/9/2024 at 7:25 am of the walk-in cooler reflected the following. - Soup that was dated use by 12-2-2024. - Sauce in a squeeze bottle that was not dated. - Jelly that was dated use by 11-26-2024. - Unknown food with no date. - Cheese that was dated use by 12-4-2024. - Potato soup that was dated use by 12-5-2024 During an interview on 12/09/24 at 7:45 am the KM was made aware of the items…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-08-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an Infection Control Program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of disease for 2 (Residents #1 and Resident #2) of 8 residents reviewed for infection control during medication pass. LVN A failed to remove her gloves and wash her hands before putting on a new set of gloves and after touching the peg tube of Resident #1, and then touching the gtube of Resident #2. These failures placed residents at an increased risk of exposure to infections, decreased quality of life or hospitalizations. Findings include: 1. Review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 08/24/24, reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] diagnosed with supraventricular tachycardia (erratic heartbeat), anoxic brain damage (occurs when the brain is deprived of oxygen), and personal history of traumatic brain injury. Review of Resident #1's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-07-31 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for one of one kitchen reviewed for dietary services. 1. The facility failed to ensure the DOM and KA A were wearing effective hair restraint, while in food prep areas. 2. The facility failed to ensure air vents were free from dirt and debris. 3. The facility failed to ensure 2 bottles of metal polish, 2 bottles of cleaner, with bleach, and a small bottle of PVC cement were kept separated from the food prep area. 4. The facility failed to ensure the kitchen's only industrial can opener was clean. 5. The facility failed to ensure the facility's only dishwasher was cleaned and de-limed. 6. The facility failed to ensure the facility's only dishwasher had the correct PPM of sanitizer to sanitize kitchen equipment. These failures could place residents at risk of ingesting chemicals and food-borne illnesses. Findings included:…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-11-01 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection and prevention control program that included, at a minimum, a system for preventing and controlling infections for 4 (Residents #44, #18, #60 and #9) of 6 residents reviewed for usage of wrist blood pressure monitor, as indicated by: The facility failed to ensure MA A cleaned and disienfected the wrist blood pressure monitor while using it on Resident #44 and Resident #18. The facility failed to ensure MA B cleaned and disienfected the wrist blood pressure monitor while using it on Resident #60 and Resident #9. This failure could place the residents at the facility at risk of transmission of disease and infection. Findings included: Review of Resident #44's face sheet, dated 10/30/23, reflected Resident #44 initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re admitted on [DATE]. She was a [AGE] year-old female diagnosed with Gastro-esophageal reflux Disease (Acid reflux), Hyperlipidemia (High fat level in blood), Type…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-01 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure all PASRR- Level I positive residents diagnosed with mental illness were provided with a PASRR- Level II Screening for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #39) reviewed for mental illness, intellectual disability, or developmental disability, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #39 received a PASRR Level 2 evaluation. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving necessary mental health services, causing a possible decline in mental health. Findings included: Record review of Resident #39's face sheet dated 10/30/23 revealed a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #39 had diagnoses which included Anxiety Disorder, Hypertension, Paranoid Schizophrenia (a serious mental illness) and Cellulitis (Deep infection) of Left Lower Limb. Record review of Resident #39's MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 09 out of 15 indicating the resident's cognition was moderately impaired. Section…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-11-01 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan addressed the resident's preferences, medical, physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #9, Resident #56) reviewed for care plans in that: The facility did not ensure Resident #9's care plan addressed her preference to sleep in a recliner chair instead of a bed. The care plan indicated Resident #9 slept in a bed. The facility did not ensure Resident #56's care plan addressed that she was taking antipsychotic or antidepressant medication. This failure placed all residents at risk for unmet care needs. Findings include: Review of Resident #9's annual MDS assessment, dated 10/20/2023, reflected a 59 y/o female who was re-admitted on [DATE] and had a BIMS score of 15. Review of Resident #9's undated care plan reflected she had diagnosis of Diabetes II, Obstructive Sleep Apnea, Rheumatoid Arthritis and HTN. The care plan reflected that Resident #9 slept in a bed. Focus:…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-11-01 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who needed respiratory care were provided with such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 (Resident #49) of five residents reviewed for respiratory care, in that: The facility failed to change oxygen tubing weekly as ordered for Resident #49. This deficient practice could place residents that receive oxygen therapy at risk for inadequate care and respiratory infection. Findings Included: Review of Resident #49's face sheet dated 11/01/23 reflected an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (a type of progressive lung disease), Atrial Fibrillation (irregular heart rhythm) , Hyperlipidemia( Hight fat level in blood), Chronic Respiratory Failure with hypoxia ( low oxygen level in tissues) and Hypertension (high Blood pressure) , Review of Resident #49's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 10/14/23, reflected a BIMS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$49,443 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $22,466 — penalty dated 2024-04-15
- $26,977 — penalty dated 2023-12-04
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 OPCO SKILLED MANAGEMENT — 66 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 2.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 1 of 5 | 2.2 | -1.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 1.7 | +1.3 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
The other 65 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.3★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 65; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| TX2 PROPCO HOLDCO, LLC | Organization | DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | since 06/01/2024 |
| DAVID M FISTEL TX LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST | since 06/01/2024 |
| DFJL, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST | since 06/01/2024 |
| DZ ARLINGTON, LLC | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST | since 06/01/2024 |
| EFROYMSON, DAVID | Individual | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 06/01/2024 |
| FISTEL, DAVID | Individual | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST | since 06/01/2024 |
| GREENFIELD, MORDECHAI | Individual | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST | since 06/01/2024 |
| ZEMEL, DANIEL | Individual | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST | since 06/01/2024 |
| NEWTON, ELIZABETH | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 06/01/2024 |
| MCGREGOR MANAGEMENT LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 06/01/2024 |
| HEATH, MICHAEL | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2024 |
| HOUSE, JANELLE | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2024 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 12 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.
5 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.
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
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
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Texas Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 455554. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-12, 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.