Baybrooke Village Care and Rehab Center
8300 Eldorado Pkwy West, McKinney, TX 75070 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 128 certified beds · (972) 548-9339 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Feb 2024
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (44) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $15,642 in federal fines (most recent 2024-02-07)
- its facility-reported quality-measure score sits well above its independent inspection score
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 3 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Worth a closer look. This home's quality-measure rating runs 3 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 — 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 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 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 3 to 4 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 | 9.0% | 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 | 0.0% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 2.4% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star 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 | 1.5% | 3.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 5.7% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 12.4% | 18.0% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 97.4% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.3% | 3.8% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 9.0% | 13.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 4.9% | 9.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.3% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 85.3% | 88.0% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 20.9% | 25.7% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 8.1% | 12.3% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.75 | 2.17 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.60 | 2.06 | 1.80 | better |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
46.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 243 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 67.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 88 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.41 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 71% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 28% 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 | 46.6%CMS range 40.7–56.1 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 10.6%CMS range 8.3–13.4 | 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 | 67.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 75.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 55.7% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 88.3% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 86.3% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 53.1% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.8% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.6%CMS range 4.2–11.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.07 | 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 128 beds and averages 94.0 residents a day — about 73% occupied, or roughly 34 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.45 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.73 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.91 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 3.00 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.63 on weekdays — 17% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.71 to 0.76 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 50% 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
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
44 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 33 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · J2024-02-07 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from abuse for 1 (Resident #1) of five residents reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to supervise and protect Resident #1, who did not have the ability to consent, from sexual abuse. CNA A was observed, on a camera video footage, engaging in an inappropriate, sexual oriented activity with Resident #1 on 02/02/24. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The IJ began on 02/02/24 and ended on 02/04/24. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began on 02/05/24. This failure placed residents at risk for serious injuries, abuse, and serious psychosocial harm. Findings included: Record Review of Resident #1's Comprehensive MDS, dated [DATE], reflected she was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included unspecified dementia, unspecified severity, without behavioral disturbance, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance and anxiety [a group of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-17 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident has a right to personal privacy and confidentiality of his or her personal and medical records for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #1's personal information was kept private and confidential when a pre-filled affidavit of heirship containing the resident's information was sent to the family of Resident #2. This failure could place residents at risk of having their sensitive information accessible to unauthorized individuals.Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's admission MDS Assessment, dated [DATE], reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's cognition was intact with a BIMS score of 15, and her active diagnoses included: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (lung disease), respiratory failure, and Type 2 diabetes (the body's inability to regulate blood glucose levels). Record review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-17 · tag F0627 — isolatedEnsure the transfer/discharge meets the resident's needs/preferences and that the resident is prepared for a safe transfer/discharge.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to permit residents from returning to the facility after a hospitalization for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #3) reviewed for discharge rights. The facility failed to allow Resident #3 to return to the facility after the resident discharged from the hospital. The facility issued Resident #3 a discharge notice on 01/23/26 for non-payment of services rendered; however, the resident appealed the discharge and the discharge was reversed after a fair hearing on 03/26/26. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving appropriate ongoing care, which could lead to worsening conditions or serious harm.Findings included:Record review of Resident #3's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 03/19/26, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident had severe cognitive impairment with a BIMS score of 3, and her active diagnoses included: stroke (blood supply to brain blocked or reduced) and Type 2 diabetes…
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 · D2026-06-02 · tag F0635 — isolatedProvide doctor's orders for the resident's immediate care at the time the resident was 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 have physician orders for the resident's immediate care, at the time the resident was admitted for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for admission orders.The facility failed to have Physician orders to provide wound care for Resident #1 who admitted on [DATE] until 2 days later on [DATE].This failure could place the residents at risk of not receiving necessary physician ordered care that could result in worsening conditions or decline in health. Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated [DATE], revealed an [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Malignant Neoplasm of thyroid gland (thyroid cancer). Record review of Resident #1's discharge MDS, dated [DATE], revealed that he expired in the facility on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #1's care plan , dated [DATE], revealed that he required a 1-2-person assistance with ADLs, and a 2-person assistance transfer with a mechanical lift due to his malignant…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-02 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate 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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan within 48 hours of a resident's admission that included the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care plan and provide a summary of their baseline care plan to residents for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for care plans.The facility failed to complete a baseline care plan that addressed hospice services for Resident #1. This failure could place residents at risk of not being provided with the necessary care and having personalized plans developed to address their specific needs.Findings included :Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated [DATE], revealed he was an [AGE] year-old male who admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Malignant Neoplasm of thyroid gland (thyroid cancer). Record review of Resident #1's discharge MDS, dated [DATE], revealed that he expired in the facility on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #1's care plan, dated [DATE], revealed that he required a 1-2-person…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-02 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure 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 from significant medication errors for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to order and administer Levothyroxine (Levothyroxine Sodium) for Resident #1 while at the facility from 05/01-[DATE]. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the intended therapeutic benefits of prescribed medications. Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated [DATE], revealed he was an [AGE] year-old male who admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Malignant Neoplasm of thyroid gland (thyroid cancer). Record review of Resident #1's discharge MDS, dated [DATE], revealed that he expired in the facility on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #1's care plan, dated [DATE], revealed that he required a 1-2-person assistance with ADLs, and a 2-person assistance transfer with a mechanical lift due to his malignant neoplasm of thyroid gland. Resident #1's care plan further…
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 · D2026-06-02 · tag F0849 — isolatedArrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice 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, observation and record review, the facility failed to collaborate with hospice representatives and coordinate the hospice care planning process for each resident receiving hospice services, to ensure quality of care for the resident, ensuring communication with the hospice medical director, the resident's attending physician, and other practitioners participating in the provision of care for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for hospice services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 had a physician order for hospice care. This failure could place residents at risk of receiving inadequate end-of-life care, coordination of care and communication of resident needs. Findings included : Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated [DATE], revealed he was an [AGE] year-old male who admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Malignant Neoplasm of thyroid gland (thyroid cancer). Record review of Resident #1's discharge MDS, dated [DATE], revealed that he expired in the facility on [DATE].…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-04-09 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews and record review the facility failed to maintain medical records that were complete and accurately documented for 2 (Resident #50 and Resident #9) of 16 residents reviewed for resident records.1. The facility failed to accurately document Resident #50's use of a hand splint on 04/07/26 and 04/08/26 when the splint was not applied.2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #9's physician orders had the correct medication administration route for eight medications, which were orders to give medications by mouth, when the resident had a nothing by mouth status. These failures could affect any resident, placing them at risk of inaccurate information and resulting inappropriate care.Findings included: Record review of Resident #50's quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 02/06/26, reflected an [AGE] year-old female admitted [DATE]. Resident #50 had diagnoses which included Diabetes Mellitus (high blood sugar resulting from the body inability to properly use insulin), Hemiplegia (paralysis of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-09 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review (PASARR) program to the maximum extent practicable to avoid duplicative testing and effort for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for PASARR.The facility failed to refer Resident #2 for a PASRR Level II assessment when the facility failed to correct his PASRR level I assessment. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving specialized services to meet their needs. Findings included:Record review of Resident #2's most recent MDS assessment dated [DATE], revealed at [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, or PTSD (a mental health condition that's caused by witnessing or being part of an extremely stressful or terrifying event). Further review of the MDS revealed a BIMS score of 15, indicating intact cognition. Record review of Resident #2's PASRR Level 1 Screening form (used to determine…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-09 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate 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 1 of 18 residents (Resident #102) reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #102 had a baseline care plan, or conversely a comprehensive care plan, within 48 hours of admission. These failures could place the residents at risk of not having their needs and preferences met. Findings included:Record review of Resident #102's 5-day MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included cancer, hypertension (high blood pressure), diabetes, respiratory failure, septic pulmonary embolism (infected blood clots that travel to the lungs causing fever, cough, chest pain, and respiratory distress), and polyneuropathy (damage to multiple peripheral nerves causing numbness, burning pain, and muscle weakness). Resident had a BIMS of 15 which indicated his cognition was intact. The MDS…
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 · D2026-04-09 · 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 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, mental, and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #56) reviewed for care plans.The facility failed to ensure Resident #56 had a care plan that addressed the residents' need for oxygen use.This failure could place residents at risk for incomplete assessments which could cause incorrect care and services in oxygen support and could result in a decline in health.Findings included:Record review of Resident #56's quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 02/09/26, reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #56 had diagnoses which included Type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications (high blood sugar resulting from the body's inability 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.
Show the remaining 33 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-09 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for one (Resident #28) of 4 residents reviewed for ADLs. The facility failed to ensure Resident #28's fingernails were kept clean.This failure had the potential to affect residents by placing them at risk for poor personal hygiene, odors and a decline in their quality of life. Findings included:Record review of Resident #28's quarterly MDS dated [DATE] reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included non-Alzheimer's dementia, anxiety disorder, and depression. Record review of Resident #28's care plan dated 02/10/26 reflected the resident required assistance with personal hygiene related to weakness. Interventions included providing extensive assistance with personal hygiene. During an observation and interview on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-04-09 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents with limited range of motion received appropriate treatment and services to increase range of motion and/or prevent further decrease in range of motion for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #50) reviewed for range of motion. The facility failed to ensure Resident #50 had her hand splint applied to her left hand per physician orders for contracture management. The failure could place residents at risk for decline in range of motion, decreased mobility, and worsening of contractures. Findings included:Record review of Resident #50's quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 02/06/26, reflected an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #50 had diagnoses which included Diabetes Mellitus (high blood sugar resulting from the body's inability to properly use insulin), Hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body) and hemiparesis (one-sided muscle weakness) following nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage…
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 · D2026-04-09 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide 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 ensure, based on a resident's comprehensive assessment, maintained acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range and electrolyte balance, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrated that this was not possible or the resident preferences indicated otherwise for of 1 of 6 residents (Resident #53) reviewed for nutrition. The facility failed to monitor Resident #53's weight when she gained 16 pounds in 20 days, while receiving all her nutrition via a feeding tube. This failure could place the residents at risk of weight loss/gain, and a decline in their physical condition. Findings included:Record review of Resident #53's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female, admitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included diabetes, stroke (when blood flow to part of the brain is blocked or a blood vessel bursts, depriving brain tissue of oxygen) aphasia…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-09 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents receiving enteral feeding received appropriate care and services to prevent complication of enteral feeding for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #9) reviewed for enteral feeding. 1. The facility failed to ensure RN G mixed each crushed medication with water and administered one medication at a time through Resident #9's g-tube.2. The facility failed to ensure RN G administered Resident #9's g-tube medication by gravity. These failures could place residents at increased risk of aspiration, bloating discomfort, and not receiving the full benefit of the medications administered.Findings included:Record review of Resident #9's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted [DATE] with diagnoses that included aphasia (language disorder resulting from damage to the brain), paraplegia (paralysis affecting the lower half of the body), malnutrition (when the body does not get enough nutrients), 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-09 · 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 respiratory care was provided consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 (Resident #56) of 6 residents reviewed for respiratory care, in that: The facility failed to obtain a physician order for Resident #56's use of supplemental oxygen.This deficient practice could affect residents who received oxygen therapy continuously placed residents at-risk for respiratory infection, and ineffective treatment.Findings included:Record review of Resident #56's quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 02/09/26, reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #56 had diagnoses which included Type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications (high blood sugar resulting from the body's inability to properly use insulin), Non-Alzheimer's Dementia (problems with memory and thinking), heart failure, hypertension (high blood pressure) and cancer. Resident #56's BIMS score was 09, which indicated moderate…
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 · D2026-04-09 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — isolatedProvide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who required dialysis received such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #58) reviewed for dialysis.The facility failed to ensure post-dialysis assessments were completed for Resident #58. This failure could place residents at risk of inadequate post-dialysis care.Findings included:Record review of Resident #58's admission MDS Assessment, dated 01/01/26, reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted [DATE]. Resident #58 had diagnoses which End-Stage Renal Disease, hypertension, heart failure, Diabetes Mellitus and hyperlipidemia. Resident #58's BIMS score was 15, which indicated his cognition was intact. The MDS Section O - Special Treatments, Procedures, and Programs reflected the resident received dialysis. Record review of Resident #58's care plan dated 03/19/26 reflected the following: Problem/Strengths: Dialysis. Goal: Improve or maintain current kidney function.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-09 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services, including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals, to meet the needs of each resident for 2 of 4 medication carts (Hall 100 and 200 carts) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure two boxes of fast acting 40% glucose gel, with an expiration date of April 2025, had been removed from the Hall 100 and 200 medication carts. This failure could place residents at risk of receiving medications that were ineffective. Findings included: Observation on 04/08/26 at 10:14 a.m., of the 100-hall medication cart with RN F revealed 1 unopened box of Fast Acting 40% Glucose Gel (concentrated, rapid absorption treatment for low blood sugar) with an expiration date of 04/2025. Observation on 04/08/26 at 10:26 a.m., of the 200-hall medication cart with RN G revealed 1 unopened box of Fast Acting 40% Glucose Gel, with an expiration date of 04/2025. Interview on 04/08/26 at 10:22 a.m., with RN F…
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 before2026-03-05 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who need respiratory care were provided such care consistent with professional standards of practice for 2 (Resident #1 and Resident#2) of 4 residents reviewed for quality of care.1. The facility failed to ensure Residents #1 was being provided with oxygen on 03/05/26 at 02:02PM as per physician's orders. 2.The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 had physician's order in her chart for oxygen that was observed being provided on 03/05/26. This failure could place residents at risk of illness and respiratory complications.Findings included:1.Record review of Resident #1's entry MDS Assessment, dated 02/02/26, reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident had severe cognitive impairment with a BIMS score of 4, and his diagnoses included Shortness of breath, and he was on continuous oxygen therapy.Record review of Resident #1's care plan dated 01/31/2026 reflected: Problem…
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 · D2026-03-05 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and records review, the facility failed to ensure residents with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing for 1 (Residents #1) of 1 resident reviewed for quality of care.The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's Stage 4 pressure ulcer on his sacrum was covered with a dressing on 03/05/26.This failure could place residents at risk of severe pain, and lead to systemic infections causing harm for residents.Findings included:1.Record review of Resident #1's entry MDS Assessment, dated 02/02/26, reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident had severe cognitive impairment with a BIMS score of 4, and his diagnoses included diabetes mellitus (a chronic metabolic disorder characterized by high blood sugar (hyperglycemia) due to insufficient insulin production (Type 1) or ineffective insulin use…
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 before2025-12-03 · 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 review, the facility failed to inform the resident's physician, responsible party, and notify, consistent with his or her authority, when there was a change in condition for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for notification of changes. The facility failed to promptly notify Resident #1's physician when a change in blood pressure was discovered for Resident #1. The physician was not made aware of the continuous low blood pressure vital checks until Resident #1 was being evaluated to be transferred to the hospital for an unrelated treatment. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of not having their physicians informed when there was a change in condition resulting in a delay in medical intervention and decline in health.Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Care Plan, dated 12/01/25, revealed a [AGE] year-old male. He was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses of hypertension (high blood pressure), Arteriovenous fistula (abnormal connection…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-11-19 · 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 that residents are free from significant medication errors for one (Resident #1) of 5 residents reviewed for significant medication errors. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received his prescribed seizure medication between [DATE] and [DATE]. This failure placed Resident #1 at risk for adverse effects, injury, and decrease in quality of life. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet dated [DATE] 10:00 am revealed he was an [AGE] year-old male re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included: encephalopathy (brain dysfunction) and epilepsy (abnormal signaling of nerve activity in the brain leading to seizures). Record review of Resident #1's MDS dated [DATE] revealed he was severely cognitively impaired with a BIMS score of 05. He utilized a walker and/or a wheelchair for mobility. He required supervision and/or set-up assistance from facility staff for cares. Record review of Resident #1's Physician…
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 before2025-11-19 · 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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure facility staff consulted with resident physician in a timely manner when there was a change in resident's physical, mental, or psychosocial status one (Resident #1) of four residents reviewed for physician notifications. The facility failed to notify Resident #1's physician that he was not provided his medication for epilepsy at any point between [DATE] - [DATE]. This failure placed Resident #1 at risk for adverse effects, injury, and decrease in quality of life. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet dated [DATE] 10:00 am revealed he was an [AGE] year-old male re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included: encephalopathy (brain dysfunction) and epilepsy (abnormal signaling of nerve activity in the brain leading to seizures). Record review of Resident #1's MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed his cognition was impaired with a BIMS score of 05. He utilized a walker and/or a wheelchair for mobility. He…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-19 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent elopement for one (Resident #1) of six residents reviewed for elopements. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 remained at the facility where he eloped [DATE] between 11:30 PM and 12:00 AM. Resident #1 was located approximately 0.1 miles away from the facility and returned to the facility by LVN F approximately 12:30 AM on [DATE]. This failure could place residents at risk of injury and a decreased quality of life.Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent elopement for one (Resident #1) of six residents reviewed for elopements. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 remained at the facility where he eloped [DATE] between 11:30 PM and 12:00 AM. Resident #1 was located approximately 0.1 miles away from the facility and returned to the facility by LVN F approximately…
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 before2025-04-23 · 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 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, and the residents' goals and preferences for 1 (Resident #1) of two residents reviewed for Respiratory Care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's breathing mask for his nebulizer (a medical device that turns liquid medicine into mist that could be inhaled through a face mask) was properly stored when not in use on 04/23/2025. This failure could place residents at risk for respiratory infection and not having their respiratory needs met. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet, dated 04/23/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with cough and anemia (low red blood cell). Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS Assessment,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for one (Resident #2) of 2 residents reviewed for Infection Control. The facility failed to ensure CNA B performed hand hygiene and changed her gloves while providing incontinent care to Resident #2 on 04/23/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of infections. Findings included: Record review of Resident #2's Face Sheet, dated 04/23/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with urinary tract infection. Record review of Resident #2 Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 01/23/2025, reflected the resident was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 14. The Quarterly MDS Assessment indicated the resident was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2025-01-30 · tag F0806 — failed to honor food preferences — patternEnsure each resident receives and the facility provides food that accommodates resident allergies, intolerances, and preferences, as well as appealing options.
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 food that accommodated their preferences for 3 (Resident #40, Confidential #1 and #2) of 8 residents reviewed for dietary services . 1. The facility failed to honor Resident #40's preferences and recommendations as indicated on his menu . 2. The facility failed to honor the preferences of Confidential Resident #1 as indicated on their menu selections. 3. The facility failed to honor Confidential Resident #2's wishes and continued to send the wrong food items on their tray. This failure could place residents at risk for not having their choices and food preferences accommodated, possible weight loss and a diminished quality of life. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #40's Face Sheet dated 1/29/25 indicated he was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Record review of Resident #40's Annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected he had a BIMS score of 13 indicatedhe was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-01-30 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for kitchen safety. 1. The facility failed to ensure food in the facility's dry storage, refrigerator, and freezer areas were labeled and dated according to guidelines. 2. The facility failed to seal open items in plastic bags in the dry storage pantry, refrigerator, and freezer areas. 3. The facility failed to ensure that expired items in the dry storage pantry, refrigerator and freezer areas were removed. These deficient practices could affect residents who received meals and/or snacks from the main kitchen and place them at risk for cross contamination and other air-borne illnesses. Findings Included: Observation of the kitchen during the brief initial tour of the kitchen on 01/28/2025 at 9:15 AM, revealed the following: Dry storage area *One open clear container with 4 bags of vanilla wafers with…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-01-30 · 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, interviews, and record review the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for four (Resident #39, Resident #40, Resident #34, and Resident #52) of nine residents observed for infection control. 1. ADON A failed to perform hand hygiene between cleaning Resident #39's wounds and applying the clean dressings. 2. ADON A failed to perform hand hygiene and change her gloves when moving between wound sites during wound care for Resident #40. 3. CNA B failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions and don a gown while providing incontinent care to Resident #34. 4. CNA C and CNA D failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions and don a gown while transferring and providing incontinent care to Resident #52. These failures placed residents at risk for healthcare associated cross contamination…
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 before2025-01-30 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents receive adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for one of two residents (Resident #38) reviewed for quality of care The facility failed to ensure LVN F and CNA J used a gait belt when transferring Resident #38 from her wheelchair to bed on 01/28/25. These failures could place residents at risk for discomfort, pain, falls, injuries, and skin tears. Findings included: Record review of Resident #38's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 01/14/25 reflected an [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #38 was severe cognitively impaired with a BIMs of 06. He had limited range of motion of both lower extremities, required total assistance with transfer from chair to bed/bed to chair. stroke, non-traumatic brain dysfunction, progressive Neurological Conditions, neurological Conditions, amputation, hip and knee replacement and fractures and multiple traumas. Review of Resident #38's care…
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 before2025-01-30 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding for one of two residents (Resident #39) reviewed for feeding tubes. 1. The facility failed to ensure LVN F flushed Resident #39's feeding tube by gravity and not by pushing water by the plunger during medication administration. 2. The facility failed to ensure LVN F checked Resident #39's feeding tube placement and residual when starting a feeding. These failures could affect residents by placing them at risk of abdominal discomfort and obstruction of the G-tube. Findings included: Review of Resident #39's face sheet dated 01/29/25 revealed, the resident was a 69- year old female, admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses include chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, type 2 diabetes, anemia, and stage 4 pressure ulcer to the sacrum. Review of Resident #39's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected the resident had a BIMS score of 04 indicating severe…
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 · D2025-01-30 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a medication error rate below 5%, for 39 medication administration opportunities with 6 errors resulting in a 15% medication error rate, for 3 of 6 residents (Residents #66, #42, & #00) reviewed for medication administration. 1. RN G failed to administerAcetaminophen 500 mg per physician order, medication was administered at 09:30 and the medication was scheduled at to be administered at 12 pm. 2. RN G failed to administer Resident #42 Olmesartan during medication administration that was scheduled at 8 am. 3. RN G failed to administer Resident #00 medication per physician orders, medications scheduled at 8 am was administered at 11:15 am This deficient practice placed residents at risk for not receiving therapeutic effects of their medications and possible adverse reactions. The findings included: Record review of Resident #66's admission record dated 1/30/2025 revealed an admission date of 08/26/22 with diagnoses which 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 before2024-09-11 · 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 observations, interviews, 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 six (Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, Resident #5, Resident # 6, and Resident #7) of eighteen residents observed for Infection Control. 1. The facility failed to ensure RN B performed hand hygiene during Resident #2 and Resident #3's wound care. 2. The facility failed to ensure MA E sanitized the blood pressure cuff between use for Resident #4, Resident #5, and Resident #6. 3. The facility failed to ensure CNA F changed her gloves and performed hand hygiene while providing incontinent care to Resident #7. These failures could place the residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of infections. Findings included: 1.Review of Resident #2's Face Sheet, dated 09/11/2024, reflected the resident was a [AGE]…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-11 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were stored securely for one (Resident #1) of five residents reviewed for storage of medications. The facility failed to ensure a bottle of Nystatin topical powder was not left inside Resident #1's room. This failure could place the residents at risk of not receiving medications as ordered by the physician, accidental overdose, or misuse of medications. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's Face Sheet, dated 09/11/2024, reflected that resident was an [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. Resident #1 was diagnosed with gastro-esophageal reflux disease (stomach acid repeatedly flows back into the tube connecting your mouth and stomach) without esophagitis( inflammation of the esophagus). Review of Resident #1's Comprehensive MDS Assessment, dated 08/23/2024, reflected the resident was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15. The Comprehensive MDS Assessment also indicated Resident #1 had…
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 before2024-07-02 · 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, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needed respiratory care was provided such care consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's nasal cannula was properly stored when not in use. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's humidifier bottle had water in it. These failures could place residents at risk for respiratory infection and not having their respiratory needs met. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's Face Sheet, dated 07/02/2024, reflected resident was an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included anxiety and chronic pain. Review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 04/07/2024, reflected the resident had a moderate impairment in cognition with a BIMS score of 09. The Quarterly MDS Assessment…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-12-07 · 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
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 facility's only kitchen. 1. The facility failed to ensure trash cans were covered and wiped down. 2. The facility failed to ensure 2 of 2 ovens were cleaned. 3. The facility failed to ensure the fryer was clean on the front and sides. 4. The facility failed to ensure the thickener container was sealed and the sugar plastic container wiped down, in the dry storage area. These failures place residents at risk for food-borne illness and food contamination. Findings include: 1. Observation on 12/05/23 at 9:48 AM revealed 3 of 4 kitchen trash cans, which had food debris, did not have full covered lids. There were food debris and particles on the trash can lid which had a 3-inch round hole in middle. One of four trash cans did not have a lid which had boxes and food debris in it between the food preparation area and dish area. One kitchen trash can lid had a crack on it from the hole to the side of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-12-07 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for two of eight residents (Residents #52 and Resident #14) reviewed for ADL care. The facility failed to ensure staff provided consistent showers/baths and grooming for Resident #52 and Resident #14. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving needed hygiene care which could cause skin breakdown, a loss of dignity and self-worth. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #52's Significant Change MDS assessment, dated 10/23/23, reflected an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. He had a BIMS of 8, which indicated he was moderately cognitively impaired. He had not rejected care and he indicated his daily preferences for choosing between a shower and sponge bath were very important to him. He was totally dependent for bathing…
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 before2023-12-07 · 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 procedures that assured the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing and administering of all drugs and biologicals, to meet the needs of each resident for three of six residents (Residents #63, # 35 and #33) reviewed for pharmacy services. 1. LVN C failed to follow the manufacturer's instructions to [NAME] the Novolin R Insulin (Hormone) Pen prior to dialing in the required amount of Insulin to be administered to Resident #63. 2. LVN C failed to follow the manufacturer's instructions to [NAME] the Admelog Insulin (Hormone) Pen prior to dialing in the required amount of Insulin to be administered to Resident #35. 3. LVN D failed to follow the manufacturer's instructions to [NAME] the Humalog Insulin (Hormone) Pen prior to dialing in the required amount of Insulin to be administered to Resident #33. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving the full dosage of medication. Findings include: 1.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-12-07 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for three of eight residents (Residents #63, #35 and #33) reviewed for infection control. 1. LVN C failed to perform hand hygiene after performing FSBS on Resident # 63. 2. LVN C failed to perform hand hygiene after performing insulin injection on Resident #63. 3. LVN C failed to perform hand hygiene after cleaning the soiled glucometer and prior to administering Resident #35's pain medication. 4. LVN D failed to perform hand hygiene after cleaning the soiled glucometer and prior to drawing up Resident #33's insulin. Theses failure could place residents at risk for cross contamination and the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #63'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.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-07 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolatedDevelop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plans were prepared by an IDT that included the attending physician and a nurse aide with responsibility for the resident, and a member of food and nutrition services staff for one of 8 residents (Resident #54) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure the attending physician, a CNA, and dietary staff participated in the care plan conference for Resident #54. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving adequate or individualized care. Findings include: Record review of Resident #54's admission MDS assessment, dated 11/29/23, reflected Resident #54 was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #54 had diagnoses which included cellulitis of right upper limb, aphasia (language disorder caused by damage in a specific area of the brain that controls language expression and comprehension) and seizure disorder . Resident #54 had a BIMS of 1, which indicated she was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-12-07 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
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, based on the comprehensive assessment of a resident, the residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan and the residents' choices for one of eight residents (Resident #35) reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to ensure facility staff reported a wound on Resident #35's right upper arm which was first observed on 12/05/23 which in a delay of treatment until 12/06/23. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the care and treatment needed to their needs. Findings include: Record review of Resident #35's admission MDS assessment, dated 11/14/23, reflected a BIMS of 10, which indicated the resident was mildly cognitively impaired. Resident #35 required moderate assistance with toileting and upper body hygiene and was dependent on putting on/taking off footwear. Resident #35 was occasionally incontinent of bowel and bladder. Resident #35 had active diagnoses which included Diabetes…
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 before2023-12-07 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for two of eight residents (Resident #10, Resident #12) reviewed for accident hazards and supervision. The facility failed to properly maintain wheelchairs for Residents #10 and #12. This failure could place residents at risk for discomfort, pain, and injuries. Findings include: 1.Record review of Resident #10's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 12/01/23, reflected an [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 10/26/21. Resident #10 had a BIMS score of 9, which indicated she was mildly cognitively impaired. Resident #10 required moderate one-person assistance with transfers, and she had limited range of motion to both lower and upper extremities on one side. The resident was occasionally incontinent of urine and bowel. The resident's active diagnoses included cerebrovascular accident (stroke) Diabetes Mellitus. Record review of Resident #10'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.
- Potential for harm · E2023-09-19 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews and record reviews the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment for areas in the facility (handrails) observed for a clean environment. The facility failed to ensure the handrails throughout the facility were cleaned daily, and in accordance with the facility's policy on Environmental Services. This deficient practice could negatively impact the facility's ability in preventing the spread of disease-causing organisms in residents' living areas and does not present a Clean Homelike Environment. Findings include: Observations on 09/19/2023 at 10:45 AM of the facility high traffic areas, such as the handrails, revealed the handrails throughout the facility had dirt particles. The handrails with dirt stains and spills on the handrails. The inside layer of the handrails contained trash wedged in the corners, built up dirtparticles and dust, and a dead fly was observed. Interview with Housekeeping R on 09/19/23 at 10:50 AM revealed, the housekeeping staff are required to clean the high traffic areas at least once 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 before2023-09-19 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure food was stored, prepared, distributed and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation. The facility failed to ensure foods in the facility's dry storage area, refrigerator, and freezer were stored according to guidelines. The facility failed to ensure the Ice Scooper Holder, located in the facility's only kitchen, was clean and sanitary. The facility failed to ensure the Iced Tea dispenser, prepared for residents, was covered, and sealed from air-borne diseases once prepared. The facility failed to ensure kitchen equipment was clean and sanitary. These failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination and other food-borne illnesses. Findings observed on 09/19/23 at 09:00 AM in the facility's only kitchen include the following: Ice Machine Scoop Holder had dirt particles on the outside and inside, with a lot of dirt particles dried up on the bottom of the Ice holder. The Ice Machine was had dirt…
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
$15,642 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $15,642 — penalty dated 2024-02-07
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 STONEGATE SENIOR LIVING — 24 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 | 3 of 5 | 2.4 | +0.6 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.3 | -0.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 3 of 5 | 2.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 3.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
The other 23 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.4★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SOUTH LIMESTONE HOSPITAL DISTRICT | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 02/27/2015 |
| UMB BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION | Organization | 5% OR GREATER MORTGAGE INTEREST | — | since 09/23/2021 |
| PRICE, LARRY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 06/01/1982 |
| PF BAYBROOKE SNF OPS, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/23/2021 |
| STONEGATE SENIOR LIVING, LP | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 06/22/2022 |
| MAJOR, SAMUEL | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/27/2025 |
| CAMPBELL, SCOTT | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2025 |
| CHANCE, JAMES | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2025 |
| FISHER, JAMES | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/04/2025 |
| LANGDON, THOMAS | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2025 |
| MCGEHEE, WILLIAM | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2025 |
| TAYLOR, JOHN | Individual | INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2025 |
| LIFETIME WELLNESS, LTD. | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/23/2021 |
| MARTUS FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/31/2023 |
| PHARMERICA DRUG SYSTEMS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 08/27/2017 |
| PRESERVATION FREEHOLD COMPANY | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/23/2021 |
| REHAB PRO LP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/23/2021 |
| SANCTUARY LTC, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/23/2021 |
| DOSHI, DIPAUNI | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/01/2024 |
| WILLIAMS, TABITHA | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 09/13/2021 |
| YAZDANI, REHAN | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 05/18/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 24 rows in the source record cover these 21 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
10 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.
This home reported $1 paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in TX
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Texas Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 676096. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-09, 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.