Greenhill Villas
2530 Greenhill Rd, Mount Pleasant, TX 75455 · For profit - Corporation · 150 certified beds · (903) 572-0974 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 May 2024
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0607, F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (45) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $154,116 in federal fines (most recent 2025-10-30)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (95%) runs well above the national median (45%)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 of 5 |
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 | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 1 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
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 | 22.4% | 15.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 6.3% | 3.0% | 5.4% | worse |
| 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 | 0.3% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 4.6% | 2.4% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 4.4% | 3.3% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 21.5% | 14.0% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 19.1% | 18.0% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.1% | 3.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 29.0% | 13.4% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 14.6% | 9.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 6.3% | 1.5% | 1.4% | worse |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 88.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 35.1% | 25.7% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 16.8% | 12.3% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.87 | 2.17 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.58 | 2.06 | 1.80 | worse |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
56.3% 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 62 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 38.1% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 21 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 0.30 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 48% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 1% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. 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 | 56.3%CMS range 46.7–67.1 | 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 | 10.8%CMS range 7.6–15.8 | 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 | 38.1% | 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 | 42.9% | 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 | 38.1% | 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 | 96.8% | 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 | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.0% | 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 | 8.1%CMS range 4.8–13.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.35 | 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 150 beds and averages 82.2 residents a day — about 55% occupied, or roughly 68 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.10 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.38 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.79 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.64 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.28 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.41 to 0.30 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 95% is well above the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
45 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 32 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-02-18 · 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 interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible and failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for quality of care. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was adequately supervised which resulted in Resident #1 leaving the facility on 08/22/24 and being found at a gas station in a town 38.1 miles east of the facility. 2. The facility failed to monitor and put measures in place to keep Resident #1 who was high risk for elopement from eloping from the facility on 08/22/24. 3. The facility failed to do a search of the surrounding area when they discovered a door alarm sounded on 08/22/24. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The IJ began on 08/22/24 and ended on 08/23/24. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. These failures could place residents at risk of potential accidents,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Immediate jeopardy · K2024-09-09 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 of 3 (Resident #1) residents reviewed for quality of care. 1. The treatment nurse failed to transcribe Resident #1's physician orders for wound care and provide wound care (clean with normal saline/wound wash, pat dry, apply collagen powder, med honey pad and secure with gauze island adhesive border once daily) to Resident #1's right lower shin from 08/23/24-08/31/24 as ordered resulting in hospitalization with a diagnosis of cellulitis (bacterial skin infection). 2. The facility failed to assess, document, and monitor for Resident #1's wound. An IJ was identified on 09/09/24. The IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 12:05 p.m. While the IJ was removed on 09/09/24, the facility remained out of compliance at a scope of pattern and a severity level of no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm that is…
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.
- Actual harm · Hcited before2025-10-30 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — patternProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with pressure ulcers received necessary treatment and services was provided, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection, and prevent new ulcers from developing for 1 of 3 resident (Resident #1) reviewed for pressure injuries. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA B and CNA C provided incontinent care, and turning and repositioning for Resident #1 on 10/09/25 and 10/10/25 causing Resident #1's wounds to worsen. 2. The facility failed to identify a wound prior to a PRN hospice visit on 10/11/2025, where the hospice nurse identified a stage ll sacral wound closed and dark in color, and by 10/13/2025 there was, per the evidence, a right heel abrasion, a left heel blister, and a sacral wound with eschar. 3. The facility failed to initiate wound care orders on 10/11/2025 and 10/12/2025. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation was identified on 10/29/2025. The IJ template was provided…
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 · D2026-02-26 · tag F0628 — isolatedProvide the required documentation or notification related to the resident's needs, appeal rights, or bed-hold policies.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that appropriate information was communicated to the receiving health care institution to include Advance Directive information for 1 of 1 (Resident #3) resident reviewed for advance directives. Resident #3's Advance Directive information was inaccurately documented on the transfer form, and a copy of the advance directive was not provided to the EMS staff or hospital staff upon transfer to the emergency room. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for not having their wishes followed according to advance care planning. The findings were:Record review of Resident #3's face sheet, dated [DATE] revealed an [AGE] year-old male admitted [DATE] and discharged [DATE] with diagnoses that included: Alzheimer's Disease (a progressive irreversible brain disease and the most common cause of dementia), Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (a progressive lung disease that causes long term breathing problems), Benign Prostatic…
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 · D2026-02-26 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) records reviewed for Resident #1 and Resident #2's Annual MDS did not correctly assess the resident's non-invasive ventilation (Bilevel Positive Airway Pressure) therapy. This deficient practice could place residents at-risk for inadequate care due to inaccurate assessments. The findings were: 1.Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 02/25/2026 revealed an [AGE] year-old male admitted [DATE] and readmitted [DATE] with diagnoses that included: Obstructive sleep apnea (a disorder where throat muscles relax excessively during sleep causing the airway to collapse and interrupt breathing), Diabetes Mellitus Type II (condition where the body resists insulin or fails to produce enough insulin causing high blood sugar), dementia (decline in memory, language, problem-solving and cognitive abilities severe enough to impact…
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 before2025-12-04 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services, including the accurate acquiring, administering and receipt of all drugs and biologicals, to meet the needs of 1 of 13 (Resident #2) residents reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure MA B stayed with Resident #2 and made sure she took her medications during medication pass 11/12/25. This failure could place residents who receive medications at risk of not receiving the intended therapeutic benefit of the medications.Findings Include:1. Record review of the face sheet dated 12/3/25 indicated Resident #2 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including COPD, diabetes, hypertension (elevated blood pressure), peripheral vascular disease (a circulatory issue with narrowed blood vessels causing leg pain), and congestive heart failure (disorder where the heart cannot pump enough blood to meet the body's needs resulting in fluid buildup). Record review of the entry 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 · Ecited before2025-10-30 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, 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 3 of 6 residents (Resident #1, Resident #2 and, Resident #3) room reviewed for infection control practices and enhanced barrier precautions. 1) The facility failed to ensure the Treatment nurse implemented enhanced barrier precautions and used PPE while providing care for Resident #1 on 10/27/25. 2) The facility failed to ensure CNA OO and CNA PP used the proper enhanced barrier precautions while providing incontinent care to Resident #1. 3) The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 Resident #2 and Resident #3 had enhanced barrier precaution signage and PPE available for staff to be aware of EBP. These failures could place residents at risk for serious complications from a communicable disease that could…
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 before2025-06-19 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — patternEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY 3. Record review of Resident #40's face sheet, dated 06/17/25, indicated she was an [AGE] year-old female, admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included dementia (a group of thinking and social symptoms that interferes with daily functioning), cerebral infarction (occurs when blood flow to the brain is blocked, causing brain tissue to die) and unstable angina (a serious heart condition characterized by chest pain or discomfort that occurs at rest). Record review of Resident #40's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] indicated Resident #40 usually understood and usually understood others. Resident #40's had BIMS score of 5 which indicated severe cognitive impairment. Resident #40 required maximal assistance with toileting and showering. Resident #40 was dependent with lower body dressing and personal hygiene. Record review of Resident #40's care plan dated 12/26/23 indicated the resident has an ADL self-care deficit. Interventions indicate anticipate needs, reorient, educate and assist resident 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 before2025-06-19 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — patternProvide 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who require dialysis services receive such services consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for dialysis services. (Resident #41) The facility failed to ensure the dialysis communication forms for Residents #41 were received back from the dialysis center after returning from dialysis treatment. The facility failed to ensure the post-dialysis assessments were completed and documented on Resident #41's dialysis communication forms on 02/17/25, 03/05/25. 04/16/25, and 06/04/25. The facility failed to ensure the post (after)-dialysis vital signs (are measurements of the body's most basic functions) were documented in Resident #41's EMR on 06/02/25, 06/11/25, 06/13/25, and 06/16/25. These failures could place residents who received dialysis at risk for complications and not receiving proper care and treatment to meet their needs. Findings included: Record review of Resident #41's face sheet dated…
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 before2025-06-19 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in (1 of 1) kitchen reviewed for dietary services. The Facility failed to label and date all food items in the refrigerator. These failures could place residents at risk for food contamination and foodborne illness. The findings included: During observation in the kitchen refrigerator 1 of 3 on 06/16/25 at 8:49 a.m., the following was observed with the Dietary Manager: - (2) separate bags of lettuce had a open date of 6/13/25 and no expiration date. -(1) bag of shredded cheese had a open date of 6/13/25 and no expiration date. During observation in the kitchen refrigerator 2 of 3 on 06/16/25 at 8:55 a.m., the following was observed with the Dietary Manager: -(1) cooked bacon and breakfast sausage had a prep date of 6//16/25 and no expiration date. -(1) leftover cooked breakfast eggs had a prep date of 6/16/25 and no expiration date. During a phone interview on 6/19/25 at 9:10 am the Dietary Manager…
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 · D2025-06-19 · tag F0582 — isolatedGive residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
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 each resident was informed before, or at the time of admission, and periodically during the residents stay, of services available in the facility and of charges for those services, which included charges for services not covered under Medicare/Medicaid or by the facility's per diem rate for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #51, Resident #73) reviewed for Medicare/Medicaid coverage. The facility failed to ensure Resident #51, and Resident #73 was given a SNF ABN (is document that informs a Medicare beneficiary that Medicare will no longer pay for skilled services) when discharged from skilled services at the facility prior to covered days being exhausted. This failure could place residents at risk for not being aware of changes to provided services. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #51's face sheet dated 06/18/25 indicated Resident #51 was a 65-years-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #51 had diagnoses including…
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 · D2025-06-19 · 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, interviews and records reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident to ensure the comprehensive care plan described the services and interventions to be used to attain and maintain the resident's practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 20 residents reviewed for care plans (Resident #71). The facility failed to care plan Resident #71's oxygen therapy usage. Resident #71 was coded for oxygen therapy on the 04/29/25 MDS assessment. This failure could place residents at risk of not having their individualized needs met, and a decline in their quality of care and life. Findings included: Record review of Resident #71's face sheet dated 06/17/25 indicated Resident #71 was an 80-years-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #71 had diagnoses including dementia (is a general term for a decline in mental ability severe enough to interfere with daily life), cough,…
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 before2025-06-19 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received care, consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent pressure ulcers based on the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 3 Residents (Resident #26) whose record were reviewed for skin integrity. The facility failed to ensure Resident #26's pressure-relieving mattress (is designed to distribute the patient's body weight over a broad surface area and help prevent skin breakdown) was on the correct settings on 06/16/25 and 06/17/25. This failure could place residents at risk for developing pressure ulcers and could contribute to developing avoidable pressure ulcers. Findings included: Record review of Resident #26's face sheet dated 06/17/25 indicated Resident #26 was an 89-years-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #26 had diagnoses including heart failure (is a condition where the heart cannot pump enough blood to meet the body's needs), pressure ulcer of right…
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 32 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-19 · 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 a resident who needed respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, the residents' goals, and preferences for 2 of 6 residents (Resident #14 and Resident #51) reviewed for respiratory care and services. 1.The facility failed to cover the nasal cannula tubing with a bag on an oxygen concentrator machine that was not in use for Resident #14. 2.The facility failed to cover the bi pap mask with a bag that was not in use for Resident #51. These failures could place residents at risk for developing respiratory complications. Findings included: 1.Record review of Resident #14's face sheet, dated 06/17/25, indicated she was a [AGE] year-old female, admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a group of lung diseases that block airflow and make it difficult to breathe), dyspnea (labored breathing)…
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 before2025-06-19 · 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biological were stored in locked compartments for 1 medication cart of 3 (Medication Cart #3) reviewed for medication storage: The facility failed to ensure Medication Cart #3 was locked when unattended. This failure could place residents at risk of having access to unauthorized medications and/or lead to harm or drug diversions. Findings included: An observation on 6/19/2025 beginning at 10:04AM, revealed, Medication Cart #3 was unlocked and unattended with no nurse or medication aide at cart for 5 minutes. The staff member responsible for the medication cart returned to the unit at 10:06 AM. All other drawers could be opened, and medication and supplies could be easily accessed. The cart was observed to have prescribed medication blister packs, over counter medications, as well as a locked narcotic box. A resident was observed seated in a wheelchair with back of chair near the medication cart, 3 additional residents were sitting in their wheelchairs approximately 10 feet from 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 · Dcited before2025-06-19 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to 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 1 of 4 residents reviewed for enhanced barrier precautions (Resident #1) infection control practices. 1. The facility failed to ensure LVN J donned a gown prior to administering feeding to Resident #1 via g-tube. Resident #1 was on enhanced barrier precautions. This failure could place residents at risk of exposure to communicable diseases, cross-contamination, and infections. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 06/17/25, indicated she was a [AGE] year-old female that admitted [DATE] with diagnoses that included: epilepsy (a disorder in which nerve cell activity in the brain disturbed, causing seizures), gastrostomy status (opening allows for a tube to be inserted, providing 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 · D2025-06-19 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
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 could call for staff assistance through a communication system which relays the call directly to a staff member or to a centralized staff work area from each resident's bedside for 1 of 20 residents (Resident #71) reviewed for resident call system. The facility failed to ensure Resident #71 had a call light that was functional. Resident #71's call light did not turn on when the button was pressed on 06/17/25. This failure could place residents at risk for a delay in assistance and decreased quality of life, self-worth, and dignity. Findings included: Record review of Resident #71's face sheet dated 06/17/25 indicated Resident #71 was an 80-years-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #71 had diagnoses including dementia (is a general term for a decline in mental ability severe enough to interfere with daily life), obesity, nontraumatic subacute subdural hemorrhage (is a collection…
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 · D2025-02-18 · tag F0573 — isolatedLet each resident or the resident's legal representative access or purchase copies of all the resident's records.
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 the resident access personal and medical records pertaining to him or herself, upon an oral or written request, in the form and format requested by the individual, if it was readily producible in such form and format (including in an electronic form or format when such records were maintained electronically, or, if not, in a readable hard copy form or such other form and format as agreed to by the facility and the individual, within 24 hours (excluding weekends and holidays) and allow the resident to obtain a copy of the records or any portions thereof upon request and 2 working days advance notice to the facility for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for access of records. The facility failed to provide Resident #2's legal representative copies of medical records after an oral request was voiced to the facility on [DATE]. This failure could place residents at risk of violation of their rights. Findings include: Record review of Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-11-26 · 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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services, including procedures that assure the accurate dispensing and administering of all drugs and biologicals to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to follow orders from 10/02/2024 to 10/06/2024 and administered to Resident #1, Aricept (Alzheimer medication), and Meloxicam (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medication) after the medications were discontinued. This failure could place residents at an increased risk for inaccurate drug administration and not receiving the care and services to meet their individual needs. Findings included: Record review of the face sheet, dated 11/09/2024, revealed Resident #1 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] for five day respite care and discharge date [DATE], with diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease (a brain disorder that gradually destroys memory and thinking skills), and unspecified osteoarthritis,…
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 · D2024-09-09 · 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 provide residents with personal privacy and confidentiality of his or her personal and medical records for 1 of 1 (Resident #1) resident reviewed for resident rights. The facility did not ensure the treatment nurse used a secure telephonic device to communicate with the wound nurse NP. This failure could place residents at risk for diminished quality of life, loss of dignity and self-worth. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 09/09/24, indicated Resident #1 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications (chronic condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar), and laceration without foreign body (an object originating outside the body if an organism), right lower leg. Record review of the quarterly MDS assessment, dated 07/08/24, indicated Resident #1 made herself understood and usually understood others. Resident #1's BIMS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-09 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to implement written policies and procedures that prohibit mistreatment, neglect, and abuse of residents, for 1 of 3 (Resident #1) residents reviewed for abuse. 1. The facility failed to implement the abuse and neglect policy and procedure regarding reporting an injury of unknown origin. 2.The facility did not implement their policy on reporting neglect for laceration of unknown origin for Resident #1 to the abuse coordinator (Administrator) or HHSC. These failures could place the residents at increased risk for abuse and neglect. Findings included: Record review of the facility policy for Abuse/Neglect revised 03/29/2018, indicated, The resident has the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property and exploitation as defined in this subpart. This includes but was not limited to freedom from corporal punishment, involuntary seclusion, and any physical or chemical restraint not required to treat the resident'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 · D2024-09-09 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source were reported immediately, but no later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, for 1 of 3 (Resident #1) residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility failed to report Resident #1's laceration to right lower leg, an injury of unknown origin, timely to HHSC. This failure to report could place the residents at risk for abuse. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 09/09/24, indicated Resident #1 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications (chronic condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar), and laceration without foreign body (an object originating outside the body if an organism), right lower leg. Record review of the quarterly MDS assessment, dated 07/08/24, indicated…
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 · D2024-09-09 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
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 have evidence that all alleged violations were thoroughly investigated for 1 of 3 (Resident #1) residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation when Resident #1 obtained a laceration to her right lower leg. This failure could place residents at risk of abuse and neglect. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 09/09/24, indicated Resident #1 was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications (chronic condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar), and laceration without foreign body (an object originating outside the body if an organism), right lower leg. Record review of the quarterly MDS assessment, dated 07/08/24, indicated Resident #1 made herself understood and usually understood others. Resident #1's BIMS score was 5, which indicated her cognition was severely…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-05-21 · 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 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for food and nutrition services. 1. The facility failed to ensure all food items were properly dated and labeled in Refrigerator #1, Refrigerator #2, and Freezer #2. 2. The facility failed to ensure all food items were properly sealed in Freezer #1. 3. The facility failed to ensure Dishwasher E properly wore a facial hair cover while in the kitchen. These failures could place residents at risk of foodborne illness and food contamination. Findings include: During an observation on 05/19/24 at 9:14 a.m., revealed in Refrigerator #2 there were 2 small plastic bowls with lids which contained a thick, yellow food item with a creamy appearance that was not dated or labeled. There were 3 small plastic bowls with lids which contained round purple food items with no date or label. There was 1 small plastic bowl with red food items with no date or label. There was a sign on the door that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-05-21 · 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 1 of 18 residents (Resident #17) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA G changed her gloves after providing incontinent care to Resident #17 prior to touching Resident #17's clean brief, shoulder, hip, gown and her blanket. 2. The facility failed to ensure CNA G handled dirty linen appropriately. 3. The facility failed to ensure CNA G performed appropriate hand hygiene prior to handling Resident #17's bed remote, drinking cup and bedside table. 4. The facility failed to ensure CNA A followed the Enhanced Barrier Precautions (interventions to prevent spread of infection in high-risk residents) to wear a gown while performing incontinent care for Resident #17 who had a urinary catheter…
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 · D2024-05-21 · 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 observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure comprehensive care plans were reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment, including both the comprehensive and quarterly review assessments for 2 of 18 residents (Resident #25 and Resident #34), reviewed for care plans. 1. The facility failed to revise Resident #25's care plan after returning from the hospital with a urinary catheter (tubing inserted to the bladder to drain urine). 2. The facility failed to revise Resident #25's care plan to indicate he refused to have his urinary catheter removed 3. The facility failed to revise and update Resident #34's comprehensive care plan to reflect the resident was placed on hospice. These failures could place residents of the facility at risk of not addressing their physical, mental, and psychosocial needs for each to attain or maintain their highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial outcome. Findings included : 1. Record review of Resident #25'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 · Dcited before2024-05-21 · 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 the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as was possible and failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 18 residents (Resident #49) reviewed for accidents and supervision. The facility failed to ensure CNA A performed a safe mechanical lift transfer for Resident #49. This failure could place residents at risk of injury. Findings include: Record review of Resident #49's face sheet dated 5/21/24 indicated he was [AGE] years old and admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #49 had diagnoses which included osteoarthritis left shoulder (degenerative disease of the shoulder joint), chronic pain, depression (persistent sadness), hemiplegia and hemiparesis (unable to move or weakness to one side of the body) following cerebral infarction (blood disruption to the brain causing brain tissue to die) and high blood pressure. Record review of Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-21 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with urinary incontinence, based on the resident's comprehensive assessment, received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections (UTI) for 2 of 4 residents (Residents #17 and Resident #25) reviewed for catheters. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #17 had an indwelling urinary catheter (tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine) securement/anchor device (used to secure an indwelling urinary catheter). 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #25 had orders for care of his indwelling urinary catheter. These failures could place residents at risk for indwelling urinary catheter dislodgement, urethral (empties urine from the bladder and out of the body) damage, pain, urinary tract infections, and not receiving needed care. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #17's face sheet dated 5/21/24 indicated Resident #17 was [AGE] years old and was initially admitted to the facility…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-05-21 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range and electrolyte balance, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrated that this was not possible or resident preferences indicated otherwise for 1 of 18 residents (Resident #66) reviewed for nutrition. 1. The facility failed to follow the dietician's recommended tubing feeding for Resident #66 to receive Glucerna 1.2 - 474 ml (2 cartons) four times a day for 2275 calories per day. 2. The facility failed to follow the facility's weight policy of weighing Resident #66 weekly times four weeks after readmission from the hospital on 4/02/24, did not follow up on Resident #66's 15 pound weight loss from admission on [DATE] to readmission on [DATE], and there was no weight obtained within 24 hours after readmission from the hospital on 5/11/24. These failures could place residents at risk for malnourishment, weight loss, skin…
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 · D2024-05-08 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents the right to be free from abuse and/or neglect for 1 (Resident #1) of 15 residents reviewed for abuse and/or neglect. The facility failed to prevent CNA A from committing verbal abuse by telling Resident #1 to hush while he was upset. This failure could place residents at risk of emotional harm. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 05/08/24, indicated he was a [AGE] year-old male, admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included spastic hemiplegia affecting right dominate side (a condition in which the part of the brain controlling movement is damaged), neuromuscular dysfunction of bladder (a dysfunction of the bladder caused by nervous system problems), depressive disorder (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest), anxiety disorder (a disorder that causes intense, excessive and persistent worry and fear about everyday situations), paraplegia…
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 before2024-05-08 · 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 to prevent accidents for 1 of 12 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for accidents and hazards in that: 1. The facility failed to ensure the back door on the memory care unit was monitored and secured while there was a malfunction with the doors locking. During this time Resident #2 eloped. 2. The facility failed to monitor and supervise resident in the memory care unit who was an elopement risk. 3. The facility failed to in-service staff on elopement response. These failures could place residents at risk for inadequate supervision and accidents. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #2's face sheet, dated 05/07/24, indicated she was a [AGE] year-old female, admitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included dementia with agitation(a term used to describe a group of symptoms affecting memory, thinking and social abilities), diabetes mellitus type 2 with diabetic neuropathy (a long-term…
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 before2024-03-22 · 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 grooming and personal hygiene were provided for 3 of 6 (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3) residents reviewed for ADLs. The facility did not provide scheduled showers for Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3. The facility did not schedule Resident #1 for a shower from February 18, 2024, through March 14, 2024 These failures could place residents at risk of skin irritation, skin infection, skin breakdown, not receiving services/care and decreased quality of life. Findings Include: 1. Record review of the face sheet dated 3/20/24 indicated Resident #1 was a [AGE] year-old male, re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis including diabetes, obesity, hypertension (elevated blood pressure), and osteoarthritis (type of arthritis that occurs when flexible tissue at the ends of bones wears down). Record…
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 before2023-03-29 · 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 respiratory care was provided consistent with professional standards of practice for 4 of 7 residents (Residents #261, #13, #2, and #28) reviewed for respiratory care and services. 1. The facility failed to document and monitor Resident #261's use of oxygen. 2. The facility failed to administer oxygen between 1-2 liters per minute via nasal cannula as prescribed by the physician for Resident #261. 3.The facility failed to administer oxygen at 2 liters per minute via nasal cannula as prescribed by the physician for Resident #13. The facility failed to ensure Resident #13's oxygen concentrator had a filter in place. 4. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 and Resident #28's oxygen concentrator filters were cleaned. These failures could place residents who receive respiratory care at risk for developing respiratory complications. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #261's order summary report, dated 03/29/2023,…
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 before2023-03-29 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — patternProvide 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 observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents who require dialysis received such services, consistent with professional standards of practice for 3 of 3 resident (Resident # 41,#26, and #311) reviewed for dialysis. The facility failed to ensure nursing staff was checking Resident #41, #26, and #311's shunt (graft catheter aids the connection from a hemodialysis access point to a major artery) to left upper arm for bruit (sound heard through a stethoscope when held over the shunt) and thrill (vibration or buzz felt when fingers are laid on top of the shunt). This failure could place residents who receive dialysis at risk for complications and not receiving proper care and treatment to meet their needs. The findings were: 1.Record review of a face sheet dated, 3/29/2023, revealed Resident # 41 was a [AGE] year-old male initially admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including chronic kidney disease, stage 4, severe (kidney failure), type 2 diabetes mellitus without…
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 · E2023-03-29 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
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 food that was palatable and served at an appetizing temperature for 12 of 17 residents (Resident #6, Resident #51, and 10 Residents in a confidential group) reviewed for dietary services. The facility failed to provide palatable food served at an appetizing temperature and taste to Resident #6, Resident #51, and 10 Residents in a confidential group. This failure could place residents who ate food from the kitchen at risk of weight loss, altered nutritional status, and diminished quality of life. Findings included: 1. Record review of a face sheet dated 03/29/2023 revealed, Resident #6 was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included hypertensive heart disease with heart failure (long-term condition with high blood pressure that affects the heart's ability to pump effectively), cardiomegaly (enlarged heart), and essential (primary) hypertension (high blood pressure). Record review 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 before2023-03-29 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food safety in the facility's only kitchen. The facility failed to ensure: o food items were dated and sealed appropriately. o expired food items were discarded. o the deep fryer was cleaned and oil changed. o a dented can was stored separately. o the ranch dressing and taco seasoning holder was clean. These failures could place residents at risk for foodborne illness. Findings included: During an observation on 03/27/2023 starting at 7:37 AM: Oil in the deep fryer was dark brown, and the deep fryer had crumbs all over and a burned French fry on the side Everything Freezer 1 opened box of biscuits unsealed no open date 1 opened box of sweet rolls unsealed no open date 1 opened box of cheesy garlic breadsticks unsealed no open date Cooking Freezer 1 opened box of pie shells with an open bag unsealed no open date Refrigerator 1 Bread and butter chips no open date 1 ziploc bag with 11 rolls not dated Freezer 2 1 opened box…
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 · E2023-03-29 · tag F0868 — patternHave the Quality Assessment and Assurance group have the required members and meet at least quarterly
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain a quality assessment and assurance committee consisting at a minimum the required committee members for 6 of 6 meetings (October 2022, November 2022, December 2022, January 2023, February 2023, and March 2023) reviewed for QAPI. The facility did not ensure the Medical Director attended their QAPI meetings in October 2022, November 2022, December 2022, January 2023, February 2023, and March 2023. This failure could place residents at risk for quality deficiencies being unidentified, no appropriate plans of action developed and implemented, and no appropriate guidance developed. Findings include: Record review of the facility's QAPI Committee sign-in-sheets indicated the Medical Director did not sign in for their meetings from October 2022, November 2022, December 2022, January 2023, February 2023, and March 2023. An attempted telephone interview on 03/29/2023 at 8:01 a.m. with the Medical Director, was unsuccessful. During an interview on 03/29/2023 at 2:37 p.m., the Administrator stated per documentation it…
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 before2023-03-29 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection 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 2 of 3 residents (Residents #58 and #111) and 1 of 1 facility reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #111 was provided COVID-19 testing when she developed signs and symptoms. 2. The facility failed to ensure dirty linen bags were not tied to the clean linen carts. 3. NA P and Housekeeper U did not utilize appropriate PPE use throughout the facility. 4. LVN N did not wear gloves while checking Resident #58's blood sugar. 5. The facility did not ensure clean linen carts were covered. These failures could place residents and staff at risk for cross-contamination and the spread of infection. 1. Record review of Resident #111's face sheet, dated 03/29/2023, revealed Resident #111 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 · D2023-03-29 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and provide care in a manner that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #17) reviewed for resident rights. The facility did not ensure CNA O and NA P treated residents with dignity and respect by referring to them as feeders. This failure could place residents at an increased risk of embarrassment, isolation, and diminished quality of life. The findings included: During an observation and interview on 03/27/2023 at 8:05 a.m., CNA O stated, I had to take a feeder back to the nursing station from the dining hall. When asked who she was referring to, CNA O stated Resident #17. CNA O was approximately 3 feet from several resident doors. CNA O stated it was not appropriate to refer to a resident as a feeder. CNA O stated she said the word feeder because she knew the surveyor would not know who she was talking about if she stated her name instead of saying feeder. CNA O stated referring to residents as feeder is…
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 · D2023-03-29 · 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 (PASRR) program to the maximum extent practicable to avoid duplicative testing and effort for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #33) reviewed for PASRR. The facility failed to indicate on the PASRR level 1 screening that Resident #33 had a mental illness. This failure could affect residents with mental illnesses and place them at risk of not being assessed to receive needed services. Findings Include: Record review of Resident #33's consolidated face sheet dated 03/29/23 indicated she was an [AGE] year-old female that was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #33 had a diagnosis of major depressive disorder (depressed mood or loss of interest in activities), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a chronic lung disease that blocks airflow and makes it difficult to breathe) and bipolar (mood swings ranging from depressive lows to manic highs). Record review of the MDS dated [DATE] indicated Resident #33 had a BIMS score…
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 · D2023-03-29 · tag F0676 — failed to keep up residents' daily-living abilities — isolatedEnsure residents do not lose the ability to perform activities of daily living unless there is 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 provide the necessary care and services to ensure that a resident's abilities in activities of daily living do not diminish based on the comprehensive assessment and consistent with the resident's needs and choices for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #58) reviewed for activities of daily living. The facility failed to provide communication assistance to effectively communicate with staff for Resident #58. This failure could place residents at risk for decline and diminished quality of life. Findings included: Record review of Resident #58's order summary report, dated 03/29/2023, indicated Resident #58 was a [AGE] year-old male, admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis which included type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications (chronic condition that affects the way the body processes blood sugar), essential hypertension (high blood pressure), and hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body) and hemiparesis (weakness of one side…
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 before2023-03-29 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 2 of 17 residents reviewed for activities of daily living. (Resident #38 and Resident #51) 1. The facility failed to provide facial hair removal for Resident #38 and Resident #51. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #51 was routinely showered and his fingernails were clean. These failures could place residents who were dependent on staff to perform personal hygiene at risk or embarrassment, decreased self-esteem, or decreased quality of life. The findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #38's face sheet, dated 03/29/2023, revealed Resident #38 was an [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of hyperlipidemia (high cholesterol) and hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side…
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 · D2023-03-29 · 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 received appropriate treatment and services to prevent further decrease of ROM for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for range of motion. (Resident #40) The facility did not ensure Resident #40 had a contracture prevention device in place for the treatment of his left contracted hand. This failure could place residents at risk for decrease in mobility and range of motion and contribute to worsening of contractures. The findings included: Record review of Resident #40's face sheet, dated 03/29/2023, revealed Resident #40 was a [AGE] year-old male who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of localization-related (focal) (partial) idiopathic epilepsy (these seizures are focal at onset-that is, emanating from a localized region of the brain) and cerebral palsy (group of disorders that affect movement, muscle tone, balance, and posture). Record review of the order summary report, dated 03/29/2023, revealed Resident #40 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 · Dcited before2023-03-29 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services, including procedures that assure the accurate dispensing and administering of all drugs and biologicals to meet the needs of each resident for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #8 and Resident #261) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to reconciliate on the treatment administration record and the Individual Patient's Narcotics Record the administration of Resident #8's Tylenol with Codeine #3 (controlled medication used for pain) on 3/21/2023 on the 6 AM to 6 PM. The facility failed to reconciliate on the Individual Patient's Narcotics Record the administration of Resident #261's Alprazolam (controlled medication used for anxiety) on 03/24/2023 at 9 PM. These failures could place the residents at risk of not having medications available for use and drug diversion. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #8's face sheet dated 03/29/2023, revealed an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses…
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 before2023-03-29 · 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
Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure that all drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with professional standards for 1 of 4 medication carts (east nurse medication cart) reviewed for drugs and biologicals. The facility failed to ensure 2 insulin pens (device used to administer insulin to residents with high blood sugars) on the east nurse medication cart were dated when opened. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the therapeutic benefit of medications. Findings included: During an observation and interview on 03/27/2023 starting at 10:36 AM, 2 insulin pens on the east nurse medication cart were opened and not dated. LVN L stated the insulin pens should be dated when opened. LVN L stated it could be because the residents were new that the insulin pens were not dated when opened. During an interview on 03/28/2023 at 4:55 PM, LVN L stated insulin pens should be dated after opened because they were only good for 28 days after opening. LVN L stated she tried to go through her medication…
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
$154,116 in federal fines across 3 penalties.
- $26,884 — penalty dated 2025-10-30
- $12,640 — penalty dated 2025-02-18
- $114,592 — penalty dated 2024-09-09
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 CREATIVE SOLUTIONS IN HEALTHCARE — 149 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 | 1 of 5 | 2.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 3.2 | -1.2 vs chain |
The other 148 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.1★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 148; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| BOWERS, SEAN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 07/01/2024 |
| CISNEROS, ALFRED | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 02/18/2008 |
| COBB, TRAVIS | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 02/11/2022 |
| COOPER, STEPHEN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 11/11/2022 |
| HARDIN, SHERRIE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 09/04/2024 |
| KERZEE, RICHARD | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 09/24/2007 |
| KORENEK, PATRICIA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 05/05/2018 |
| SOECHTING, PAUL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 11/22/2024 |
| STRACK, JOE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 02/11/2022 |
| HUGGINS, LINDA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 06/01/2022 |
| WILLIG, ZACHARY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2025 |
| THOMPSON, JOHNNY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/01/2024 |
| MT PLEASANT V ENTERPRISES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/15/2025 |
| BLAKE, GARY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2022 |
| BLAKE, MALISA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 09/01/2022 |
| BARKER, DONYA | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/15/2025 |
| ZARCONE, GREGORY | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 19 rows in the source record cover these 17 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in TX
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Texas Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 676241. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-19, 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.