Pampa Nursing Center

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

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.

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.

52.1% 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 33 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 38.5% 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 26 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 0.29 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 46% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 88 beds and averages 47.5 residents a day — about 54% occupied, or roughly 40 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 3.05 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.33 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.63 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 2.74 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.17 on weekdays — 14% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.36 to 0.26 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 47% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are 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.

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.

22 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 12 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-06-11 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — widespread
  Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on interview and record review the facility failed to designate a registered nurse to serve as the director of nursing on a full-time basis for 1 of 1 facility reviewed for a DON.The facility failed to have a full-time DON. The last day of the previous DON was 04/06/2026.This failure could place residents at risk of not having their needs met and/or feeling unheard due to no nursing oversight.Findings Included:During an interview on 06/11/26 at 06:22 AM MDS RN (who was standing in for ADM, who was on vacation) stated the facility had not had a DON since the first week of April.During an interview on 06/11/26 at 07:24 AM LVN E stated the facility had not had a DON for going on 2 months. She stated residents do not have anyone to talk to about their concerns now that the previous DON was no longer employed. LVN E stated the previous DON always had her door open and was available to listen to residents.During an interview on 06/11/26 at 07:45 AM MDS RN stated the last time the facility had an RN was on 04/06/26.During an interview on 06/11/26 at 08:34 AM LVN F stated 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.

  Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-11 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure each resident the right to a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely for 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3) of 5 residents reviewed for homelike environment.The facility failed to ensure the sink in the bathroom shared by Residents #1, #2, and #3 was plumbed properly and not draining into a 5-gallon bucket from at least 05/02/26 to 05/26/26.This failure could place residents at risk of feeling neglected and/or unimportant.Findings Included:1. Record review of Resident #1's admission record dated 06/11/26 revealed an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged from the facility on 05/29/26.Record review of Resident #1's significant change MDS assessment completed on 03/20/26 revealed a BIMS score of 5 which indicated severely impaired cognition. Section GG Functional Abilities revealed Resident #1…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2026-06-11 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — pattern
  Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, staff and the public for 3 (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3) of 5 residents and 2 (Shower A and Shower B) of 2 showers reviewed environment.The facility failed to ensure the sink in the bathroom shared by Residents #1, #2, and #3 was plumbed properly and not draining into a 5-gallon bucket from at least 05/02/26 to 05/26/26.The facility failed to ensure the floors of both showers were free of broken, chipped, or missing tiles and clean around the bottom edges where the floor met the walls of the showers.These failures could place residents at risk of feeling uncomfortable/neglected in their home.Findings Included:1. Record review of Resident #1's admission record dated 06/11/26 revealed an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged from the facility on 05/29/26.Record review of Resident #1's significant change 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.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-05 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all residents had the right to formulate an advanced directive for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 residents reviewed for advanced directives. Resident #1's DNR form lacked dated witness acknowledgments and therefore was not fully executed. This failure could place residents at risk of receiving medical treatment inconsistent with their or their legal representative's expressed wishes.Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated [DATE] revealed he was an [AGE] year-old male resident admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to Cerebral Infarction (stroke), Frontal Lobe and executive function deficit following cerebral infarction (damage to the frontal lobe due to stroke), and Parkinson's disease without dyskinesia (neurological disorder). Resident #1 was identified as a DNR in the Advance Directive section. Record review of Resident #1's quarterly MDS Assessment was completed on [DATE]. In section…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-23 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation and interview the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely for 2 (Resident #4 and Resident #12) of 12 resident's reviewed for homelike environment.1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4 stored her chips in an airtight, sealed container.The facility failed to ensure Resident #4's personal refrigerator temperature was checked daily.2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #12's personal refrigerator was cleared of old food. These failures could place residents at risk of pests and/or food borne illness.Findings Included:1. Record review of Resident #4's admission record dated 07/22/25 revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included, but were not limited to, epilepsy (disorder that causes abnormal brain function, seizures), Parkinson's disease (chronic and progressive movement disorder that initially causes tremors…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-23 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet residents' medical, nursing and mental and psychosocial needs for 1 of 12 residents (Resident #42) whose care plans were reviewed.The facility failed to ensure Resident #42's care plan addressed the resident's need for oxygen therapy. This deficient practice could result in residents not receiving the appropriate and necessary care and services. Findings included: Record review of Resident #42’s Face Sheet dated 7/22/2025, revealed an [AGE] year-old female resident admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including but not limited to: Congestive Heart Failure (is a long term condition where the heart cannot pump blood effectively leading to fluid build up in the lungs), asthma (long term inflammatory disease of the lungs). Record review of Resident #42's MDS, dated [DATE], revealed 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-23 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
  Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who need respiratory care were provided such care consistent with professional standards of care for 1 of 12 residents (Resident #42) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to administer oxygen at the correct dose for Resident #42. This failure could affect all residents on oxygen therapy by placing them at risk for respiratory compromise and associated complications such as shortness of breath, confusion, respiratory failure, and exacerbation of their condition. Findings included: Record review of Resident #42's face sheet, dated 07/22/2025, revealed Resident #42 was a [AGE] year-old female resident admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications (a condition where blood sugar levels are persistently high due to either the body's inability to use insulin effectively (insulin resistance) or the pancreas doesn't produce enough insulin, or both),…

  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 · Fcited before2024-06-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with the professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation. 1. The facility failed to ensure freezer items were properly stored, labeled, and dated. 2. The facility failed to ensure personal items were not in the prep area. 3. The facility failed to ensure pantry foods were properly stored, labeled, and dated. 4. The facility failed to ensure proper hand hygiene and glove use was practiced. 5. The facility failed to ensure cleanliness in the kitchen. These failures could place residents who ate food served by the kitchen at risk of food-borne illness. Findings include: Observation of the freezer on 6/23/24 at 9:20 AM revealed the following: 1. (1) Ziplock bag of coconut with a use by date of 5/26/24. 2. (1) box of frozen vegetables , not sealed and open to air. 3. (1) box of frozen cookie dough, not sealed and open to air. 4. (1) box of frozen biscuit dough, not sealed and open to air. 5. (1) box of frozen…

  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 · D2024-06-25 · tag F0623 — isolated
  Provide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
  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 notify the resident or a representative of the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman of the transfer or discharge for 1 (Resident #30) of 3 residents reviewed for transfers/discharges. The facility failed to notify Resident #30 of her transfer to the hospital and pending discharge. The facility failed to notify a representative of the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman of Resident #30's discharge. This failure could affect residents at the facility by placing them at risk of being transferred/discharged and not having access to available advocacy services, discharge/transfer options, and appeal processes. Findings include: Record review of Resident #30's face sheet dated 06-24-2024 revealed a [AGE] year-old female resident admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include cerebral infarction (occurs as a result of disrupted blood flow to the brain due to problems with the blood vessels that supply it), pneumonia (lung…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2024-06-25 · tag F0700 — isolated
  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 interview, and record review the facility failed to review the risks and benefits of bed rails with the resident or resident's representative and obtain informed consent prior to installation of bed rails for 2 (Resident #20 and #24) of 17 residents reviewed for bedrails. The facility failed to inform Resident #20 and #24 or their representatives for the use of bed rails and obtain consent for the use of bed rails. This deficient practice could place all residents with bed rails at risk for injuries such as abrasion, fractures, and entrapment. Finding include: Resident #20 Record review of Resident #20's clinical record revealed an [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility originally on 01-4-2023 and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses to include cerebral infarction (occurs as a result of disrupted blood flow to the brain due to problems with the blood vessels that supply it), Parkinson's (a disorder of the central nervous system that affects movements to include tremors), hypertension (a condition…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

Fines & penalties

$4,085 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $4,085 — penalty dated 2024-06-25

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 FANNIN COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT — 5 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 5 rows in the source record cover these 3 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

About 75% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in TX