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

Trucare Living Centers

2265 S Sycamore St, Palestine, TX 75801 · Government - Hospital district · 120 certified beds · (903) 723-2592 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (903) 723-2592 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 10 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (25% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
1/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
112 Medical Dr · (903) 729-0444 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
101 Medical Dr · (903) 729-3100 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
2223 S Loop 256 · (903) 681-8265 · Call to confirm hours
Park
999 S Dorrance St · (903) 731-8415 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1907 S Sycamore St · (903) 723-0231

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 3 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 4 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating5★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased10.5%15.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.4%3.0%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.3%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.1%0.8%2.0%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms2.2%2.4%6.5%typical for the state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury10.6%3.3%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened4.2%14.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication10.3%18.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.8%3.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control11.9%13.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table4.5%9.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%88.0%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission29.0%25.7%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit20.5%12.3%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.952.171.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days2.692.061.80worse

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.

55.4% 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 101 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

55.4%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.0%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
74.1%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.43U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.19hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.17hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 74.1% 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 54 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 0.43 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 73% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF55.4%CMS range 46.8–63.951.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.0%CMS range 6.7–11.910.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge74.1%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge74.1%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge79.6%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting100.0%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened6.7%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization7.8%CMS range 4.6–12.57.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.341.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

0.28
RN hours/ resident / day
0.80
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.51
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.59
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.22
RN hoursweekends
25.0%
Total nursing turnover
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 81.0 residents a day — about 68% occupied, or roughly 39 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 3.59 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.28 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.51 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.20 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.74 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.30 to 0.22 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 25% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-12-17)
6
at the previous standard inspection (2024-09-18)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-17 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #58) reviewed for care plans.The facility failed to ensure Resident #58's care plan reflected intervention of prophylaxis antibiotic indefinitely for prevention of urinary tract infection.This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving appropriate care to meet their current needs. The findings included: Record review of a face sheet dated 12/16/2025 for Resident #58 indicated she originally admitted on [DATE] and readmitted to the facility on [DATE] and was [AGE] year-old female with diagnoses of atrial fibrillation (rapid heart rate) malnutrition, lack of coordination. Record review of a Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #58 indicated she had moderate impairment in thinking with a BIMS score of 9. Resident #58 was dependent on personal hygiene including toileting. Section N - Medications indicated Resident #58 was taking 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-17 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 12 residents and 1 of 1 medication rooms (Resident #26 and medication room B) reviewed for pharmacy services. 1. The facility failed to remove Resident #26's insulin that had expired on [DATE] from the nurse medication cart. 2. The facility failed to date when tuberculin PPD was opened. These failures could place residents who receive medications at risk of not receiving the intended therapeutic benefit of the medications, decreased quality of life, and hospitalization. Findings: 1. Record review of Resident #26's facility face sheet revealed Resident #26 was a [AGE] year-old female that was admitted on [DATE] with a diagnosis of senile degeneration of the brain (impaired memory). Record review of Resident #26's comprehensive care plan…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-12-17 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on 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 2 of 8 residents (Residents #49 and #53) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA C performed hand hygiene between glove changes during peri-care on 12/15/25 with Resident #49. 2. The facility failed to ensure CNA A and LVN B followed enhanced barrier precautions and wore a gown and gloves when providing direct care to Resident #53 on 12/15/2025. These failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination and infection. Findings: 1. Record review of a facility face sheet dated 12/16/25 for Resident #49 indicated he was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including dementia and arthritis. Record review of a Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] for…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-09-18 · tag F0641 — pattern
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure an accurate MDS was completed for 6 of 15 residents (Residents #40, #53, #70, #74, #17, and #7) reviewed for MDS assessment accuracy. 1.The facility incorrectly coded Resident #40 as having received Insulin in previous 14 days while a resident on his MDS Assessment. 2.The facility failed to accurately code on the MDS assessments for Resident's #53 on 8/10/2024, #70 on 7/20/2024, #74 on 8/29/2024 and #7 on 8/7/2024 who had side rails on their bed. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving the appropriate care and services to maintain the highest level of well-being. Findings included: 1. Record review of the facility face sheet dated 9/17/2024 for Resident #40 reflected that he was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (insufficient production of insulin, causing high blood sugar), reduced mobility and muscle weakness. Record review of 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-09-18 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews the facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and time frames to meet a resident medical and nursing needs to be furnished to attain or maintain the residents highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 5 of 18 residents (Residents #53, #70, #13, #74, and #130) reviewed for care plans in that: The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for the use of enabler bars for Resident #13 that were put into use on 4/3/21. The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for the use of side rails for Resident #74 that were put into use on 5/29/24. The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for the use of a side rails for Resident #130 that was put into use on 7/30/24. The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for the use of side rails for Resident #53 that was put into use on 12/7/2023. The facility failed to develop 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.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-09-18 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — pattern
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents' environment remains as free of accident hazards as possible for 2 of 11 residents reviewed for quality of care, (Resident #6 and #281) in that: The facility failed to remove worn, damaged and bleached mechanical lift slings from service for Residents #6 and #281. The facility failed to obtain physician orders for mechanical lift transfers for Resident #6. This deficient practice could result in a loss of quality of life due to injuries. Findings included: Record review of a facility's face sheet dated 5/21/24 for Resident #6 indicated that she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including: Lack of co-ordination, osteoarthritis (degeneration of the bones) and muscle weakness. Record review of a Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] for Resident #6 indicated that she was rarely/never understood, and that Resident #6 was severely cognitively impaired. Assessment also 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-09-18 · tag F0700 — pattern
    Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
    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 attempt to use appropriate alternatives prior to installing a side or bed rail, assess the resident for risk of entrapment from bed rails prior to installation, and review the risks and benefits of bed rails with the resident or resident representative and obtain informed consent prior to installation for 4 of 24 residents (Resident #53, #70, #74,and #16) reviewed for bed rails. 1.The facility failed to attempt to use an alternative for the use of bedrails and complete quarterly side rail assessments for Resident #53 who re-admitted to the facility on [DATE] and a order with a start date of 12/7/2023 for use of enabler bars to turn and reposition in bed. 2.The facility failed to attempt to use an alternative for the use of bedrails and complete quarterly side rail assessments for Resident #70 who admitted to the facility on [DATE] and an order for Resident #70 that reflected the use of enable bars to turn and reposition in bed that started…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-18 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate 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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to refer all residents with newly evident or possible serious mental disorder, intellectual disability, or a related condition for level II resident review upon a significant change of condition for 1 of 6 Residents (Resident #53) reviewed for PASSAR (Preadmission Screening and Resident Review Services). The facility failed to ensure Resident #53 had a new level 1 PASSAR completed with a diagnosis of bipolar disorder on admission [DATE]. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving the needed PASSAR services to meet their individual needs and could result in a decreased quality of life. The findings included: Record review of a face sheet for Resident #53 dated 9/17/2024 for Resident #53 indicated she admitted to the facility 2/21/2024 and was [AGE] years old with diagnosis of acute and chronic respiratory failure (a condition that makes it difficult to breathe on your own), type 2 diabetes, COPD (a lung disease causing restricted…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-09-18 · tag F0813 — isolated
    Have a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors.
    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 and ensure safe and sanitary storage of residents' food items, per facility policy, for 1 of 11 resident's (Resident #54) personal refrigerators reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to ensure a personal refrigerator on 09/16/2024 for Resident #54 did not contain a jar of mayonnaise with an expiration date of 8/25/2024. These failures could place residents at risk for food borne illnesses. Findings include: Record review of a face sheet for Resident #54 dated 9/17/2024 indicated he admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was [AGE] years old with diagnoses of venous insufficiency (occurs when the veins in the legs have difficulty returning blood to the heart), malignant neoplasm of prostate (prostate cancer) and dementia. Record review of a resident/patient refrigerator log dated September 2024 indicated on 9/16/2024 the refrigerator was checked as indicated by the initials of RNA. Record review of an…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-08-16 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services, including procedures that assures the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of medications for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #39) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility did not ensure medications were properly administered to Resident #39. This failure could place residents at risk for the unsafe administration of medications and not receiving prescribed doses of ordered medications. Findings: Record review of facility face sheet dated 8/15/2023 indicated Resident #39 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of respiratory failure with hypoxia (low oxygen level) and end stage renal disease. Record review of quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed Resident #39 had a BIMS of 12 indicating mild cognitively impairment. Record review of comprehensive care plan dated 06/28/2023 did not indicate Resident # 39 could safely self-administer medications. Record review of physician order 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
FANNIN COUNTY HOSPITAL AUTHORITYOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 05/01/2026
BYRUM, JOEIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2026
PETERSON, MARCOIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2018
KEETCH, CHADIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/01/2011
SANDERSON, CLARKIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 05/01/2026
SANDSTONE CREST HEALTHCARE LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/15/2026
BURNAM, SOONIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 05/01/2026
ENSIGN SERVICES INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 02/13/2026
STANDARD BEARER HEALTHCARE OP, LPOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2026
SYCAMORE STREET HEALTH HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2026
THE ENSIGN GROUP INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 05/01/2026

CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 11 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$8.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+15.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 54%Medicare 11%Other / private 35%

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

$243per resident / day
operating cost
$7,377per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$287per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in TX

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 676257. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-17, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next