Colonial Manor Advanced Rehab & Healthcare
1100 W Minnesota Rd, Pharr, TX 78577 · Government - Hospital district · 123 certified beds · (956) 686-2243 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 Nov 2025
- it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — 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
- a high number of inspection citations overall (37) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $54,998 in federal fines (most recent 2025-07-16)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 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 | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 2 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 13.0% | 15.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 7.9% | 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 | 0.0% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.3% | 2.4% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.9% | 3.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 14.2% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 20.5% | 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 | 0.9% | 3.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 8.7% | 13.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 22.6% | 9.6% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 4.1% | 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 | 32.0% | 25.7% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 23.2% | 12.3% | 12.0% | worse |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.99 | 2.17 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.16 | 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.
57.5% 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 63 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 56.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 50 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 0.44 therapist hours per resident per day in 2025Q4 — more than 76% of the 13,714 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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 14% — 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 | 57.5%CMS range 47.8–69.3 | 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 | 11.8%CMS range 7.9–16.6 | 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 | 56.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 48.0% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 56.0% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 97.8% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 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 | 8.5%CMS range 4.6–15.2 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.24 | 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 123 beds and averages 115.8 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 7 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 3.42 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.13 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.90 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.13 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.42 on weekdays — 8% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.16 to 0.11 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 39% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
37 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 25 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-07-16 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure adequate supervision was provided to prevent accidents for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for supervision.CNA A did not follow 2-person assist as stated on Resident #1's care plan when providing incontinent care and repositioning on two separate occasions on [DATE] at around 12:00am and 1:00am. On [DATE] at 3:30am CNA A found Resident #1 on the floor. Resident #1 was sent to the hospital and later expired on [DATE].An IJ was identified on [DATE]. The IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 3:51pm. While the IJ was removed on [DATE], the facility remained out of compliance at a scope of isolated and a severity level of no actual harm with potential for more than minimal harm due to the facility continuing to monitor the implementation and effectiveness of their Plan of Removal. These deficient practices could affect residents who require 2-person assist by placing them at risk of injuries and not receiving…
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 · Gcited before2024-02-17 · 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, record review, and observation, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 6 resident (Resident #51) reviewed for accidents. The facility did not provide supervision to prevent Resident #51's from sustaining multiple falls in the facility. This failure could place residents with a history of falls at risk for additional falls and injuries. The findings included: Record review of Resident #51's admission record dated, 8/15/2023, revealed he was an [AGE] year old male, with an initial date of 6/17/2019, and had the following diagnosis: multiple fractures of ribs to the right side with routine healing a laceration without foreign body of left forearm, unspecified fracture of first lumbar vertebra (the five bones in your lower back) with routine healing, a wedge compression fracture of second lumbar vertebra with routine healing, an abnormality of gait and mobility, a lack of coordination, age-related physical…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-25 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — patternHave 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 use the services of a registered nurse for at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week, for 2 (03/01/2026 and 03/15/2026) of 90 days reviewed for RN hours, for the months January 1, 2026 through March 31, 2026.The facility failed to have RN coverage for 2 days on Sunday, 03/01/2026 and 03/15/2026.This failure could place residents at risk of harm by denying residents the advanced critical thinking skills a registered nurse could provide.Findings included:Record review of the facility's March 2026, nursing schedule reflected that on 03/01/2026 and 03/15/2026, there were no RNs scheduled. During an interview on 06/24/2026 at 9:00 a.m., the Administrator said it was the responsibility of the facility's DON to ensure the facility had 8 consecutive hours of RN coverage 7 days a week. The Administrator said the facility had recently changed their software. She said the software company that was responsible for reporting staffing statistics to CMS/PBJ (mandatory quarterly reporting system) up to end of May 2026 was their…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-25 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for two of two nourishment rooms. 1. The facility failed to ensure refrigerator temperature logs were filled out correctly for nourishment room [ROOM NUMBER]. 2. The facility failed to ensure food items in nourishment room [ROOM NUMBER] were labeled and dated appropriately. 3. The facility failed to ensure that there were no personal items stored in the refrigerator in nourishment room [ROOM NUMBER]. 4. The facility failed to ensure that leftovers were discarded within 72 hours in nourishment room [ROOM NUMBER] refrigerator. These failures could place residents who consumed food from the kitchen at risk for food borne illness. Record review of temperature log for nourishment room [ROOM NUMBER] indicated two places for documentation of temperatures. The option 1 was indicated for use of storage vaccines with a minimum and maximum…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-25 · 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 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 4 Residents (Residents #122, #106, #92 and #12) of 11 residents reviewed for infection control practices during personal care:1. The facility staff were not following Isolation Precautions on wearing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) when entering Resident #122's room.2. Resident #106 was not on EBP and/or isolation precautions for known contagious diseases. 3. Resident #92 was not on EBP and/or isolation precautions for known contagious diseases. These failures could place residents that require assistance with personal care as well as employees and visitors, at risk of communicable diseases and healthcare-associated cross-contamination and infections. The findings included: he findings included: 1.Record review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-25 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident had a right to personal privacy including personal care for 1 staff (LVN A) providing care to 1 of 3 residents (Resident #19) reviewed for personal privacy, in that: LVN A did not closed Resident #19's privacy blinds during medication administration via feeding tube, leaving the resident in plain view of the outside parking lot area. The deficient practice could affect residents in the facility who received medication via mic-key-tube and could result in the resident being unnecessarily exposed and cause embarrassment. The findings were: Record review of Resident #19's face sheet dated 06/25/2026 revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included unspecified nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage (bleeding in the brain not caused by injury) and spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy (causing severe muscle stiffness in all four limbs, body, and face). Record review of Resident #19's 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.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-25 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality care for 1 (Resident #122) of 8 residents reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility failed to include Resident #122's use of contact precautions in her baseline care plan. This failure could result in residents not receiving needed care and treatment.Findings Included: Record review of Resident #122's admission Record dated 06/23/2026 revealed she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted [DATE] with diagnoses which included dementia (general term for loss of memory, language, problem-solving and other thinking abilities) and unspecified psychosis (when a person has trouble telling the difference between what's real and what's not), ESBL in urine (indicates an urinary tract infection caused by bacteria that produce an enzyme rendering many common…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-25 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that the comprehensive care plans were reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment, for 3 residents (Resident #106, #92, and #12) of 8 residents whose care plans were reviewed for timing and revision.1. Resident #106's care plan did not indicate isolation precautions for known contagious diseases.2. Resident #92's care plan did not indicate isolation precautions for known contagious diseases until 06/24/26. 3. Resident #12's care plan did not indicate isolation precautions for known contagious diseases. These failures could affect residents in the facility by placing them at risk of not being provided with necessary care or services and not having personalized plans developed to address their specific needs.The findings were:1. Record review of Resident #106's face sheet indicated an [AGE] year-old female with an admission date on 03/11/26 and an original admission date on 10/28/19. 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 before2026-06-25 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for one resident (Resident #8) of 24 residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to follow or revise the physician's orders for Resident #8's soft helmet to be on at all times, may remove for bathing. Resident #8 was not wearing his helmet, and it could not be found anywhere in his room.This deficient practice could affect residents who require care and monitoring, placing them at risk of not receiving the care and services they need.Findings were:Record review of Resident #8's face sheet revealed a [AGE] year-old male with an admission date of 05/14/26 and an original admission date of 01/27/25. Diagnoses included stroke with left non-dominant paralysis, diabetes, mood disorder, major depressive disorder, recurrent/moderate anxiety disorder, cancer, high blood pressure, obstructive uropathy (blockage of the urinary tract…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-25 · 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 possible for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #121) reviewed for accidents and hazards: The facility failed to ensure a (diabetic) lancet was not left sitting on top of Resident #121's bedside table unattended. This failure could place residents at risk of access to or injury from a lancet.Findings were: Record review of Resident #121's admission Record dated 06/23/2026 revealed she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted [DATE] with diagnoses which included diabetes mellitus due to underlying condition with hyper glycemia (a chronic metabolic condition where the body either resists the effects of insulin or does not produce enough to maintain normal glucose levels). Record review of Resident #121's entry MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed a BIMS score of 14 indicating intact cognitive status. Record review of Resident #121's Baseline Care Plan initiated 06/21/2026 revealed:…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-25 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care, is provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, the residents' goals, and preferences for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #40) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure proper storage of Resident #40's nebulizer mask tubing when it was not kept in a plastic bag when not in use. This failure could place residents requiring oxygen at risk for respiratory infections due to the potential for microorganisms infiltrating their oxygen, nebulizer equipment and supplies causing a decline in physical health. The findings included: Record review of Resident #40's face sheet, dated 06/23/2026, revealed resident was a [AGE] year-old male, admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnosis included acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (lungs cannot provide enough oxygen to the blood and the organs). Record review of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-25 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to establish a system of records of disposition of all controlled drugs in sufficient detail to enable an accurate reconciliation, for four Resident (Resident #25) of 14 residents reviewed for controlled medication use, in that: Resident #25's Individual Resident's Controlled Substance Record did not accurately reflect Resident#25's Tramadol medication amount on hand. This failure could place all residents on the 500 hall at risk for medication overdose, medication under-dose, and ineffective therapeutic outcomes. The findings included: Record review of Resident #25's admission Record dated 06/23/2026 reflected she was an [AGE] year old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus without complications (a chronic metabolic condition where the body wither resists the effects of insulin or does not produce enough to maintain normal glucose levels), contracture to right hand (the permanent tightening or shortening of…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 25 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-29 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — isolatedProvide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record reviews the facility failed to ensure a resident receives treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's choices, and maintains acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range and electrolyte balance, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrates that this is not possible or the resident preferences indicate otherwise, for 2 (Resident #1 and Resident #2) of 7 residents, reviewed for nutritional status.The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 and Resident #2 were weighed weekly per physician's orders. This failure could place residents at risk for nutritional deficit, weight loss, skin breakdown, and overall decline in quality of life.Findings included:1. Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 05/28/26, reflected an [AGE] year-old female, admitted on [DATE] diagnoses included: other fracture of left patella…
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 · D2026-05-14 · 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 drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored in locked compartments under proper temperature controls and permit only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for 1 of 2 medication carts (400 hallway cart) reviewed for medication storage. The facility failed to ensure a medication named Normal Saline flush was not sitting on top the unattended 400 hall medication cart on 3/12/26 at 3:45 p.m. This failure could place all residents at risk of misuse of medication and decreased quality of life. Findings included: During an observation on 05/12/2026 at 3:45 p.m., revealed on top of the unattended 400 hall medication cart, there was a saline flush. During an interview on 05/12/2026 at 3:50 p.m., with LVN A she said normal saline flush should have been inside the medication cart and locked. She said a resident could take the normal saline, other residents or visitors. She said residents could have an allergic reaction or the normal saline flush could get contaminated. During an interview…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-14 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an Infection 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 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA B and CNA C used the required personal protective equipment for Resident #1, who was on enhanced barrier precautions due to feeding tube during incontinent care on 05/13/26. 2. The facility failed to ensure CNA B performed hand hygiene while providing incontinent care to Resident #1 on 05/13/26 and failed to ensure CNA B and CNA C performed hand hygiene for at least 20 seconds. These failures could place the residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of infection.Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 05/13/26 reflected a [AGE] year-old female with and admission date 08/16/19. 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 before2026-03-19 · 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 that residents who needed respiratory care were provided such care consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for respiratory care.The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's oxygen was administered at the prescribed setting of 3 liters per minute on 3/19/2026 as ordered by the physician.This deficient practice could place residents at risk of developing respiratory complications and a decreased quality of care. Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's admission record, dated 3/19/26, indicated a [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 3/12/2026. Resident #1's diagnoses included chronic pulmonary edema (a long-term condition where fluid slowly builds up in the lung's air sacs, making it hard to breathe), acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (a condition defined by 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 before2026-01-15 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with the comprehensive person-centered care plan and in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 of 4 residents reviewed for quality of care (Resident #1).The facility failed to respond to Resident #1's call light to provide care for 1 hour and 45 minutes on 12/25/2025.This failure could place residents at risk for a delay in care and services. Findings included:Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 1/15/2025 indicated a [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 7/17/2024. Resident #1's diagnoses included: Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis (paralysis or weakness to one side of the body) affecting left non-dominant side, Contracture of Muscle (muscle in a tight position, making it hard to move) Left Hand, Lack of Coordination, Schizoaffective Disorder (intense mood swings and reality-bending psychotic episodes), Epilepsy (brain disorder causing recurring seizures).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 · D2025-11-20 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure each resident the right to be free from abuse for two residents (Resident #2 and Resident #3 ) of 6 residents reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to protect R #2 and R #3 from being hitting each other on 10/15/25 as they passed each other in the hallway. These failures have the potential to place residents at risk of serious injury and continued abuse.The Findings Include: Resident #2 Record review of R #2 face sheet revealed an [AGE] year-old male initially admitted on [DATE] and then readmitted on [DATE] with diagnosis of physiological condition(the internal physical and chemical states of a living organism that affect its bodily functions, ranging from maintaining homeostasis to experiencing illness or stress, Dementia (A group of thinking an social symptoms that interferes with daily functioning), and Insomnia (a common sleep disorder characterized by difficulty falling asleep, staying asleep, or both, leading to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-16 · 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 all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property were reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, if the alleged violation involved abuse or resulted in serious bodily injury, to the administrator of the facility and to other officials (which included to the State Survey Agency) in accordance with State law through established procedures for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for reporting injuries of unknown origin. The facility failed to report within 2 hours to Health and Human Services Commission when Resident #1 was found on the floor on [DATE] at 3:30am with a laceration to forehead that the resident was unable to explain and was not witnessed and required her to be sent to the hospital. This failure could place residents at risk for undetected abuse, neglect and/or decline in…
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 · D2025-04-24 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of each resident's needs, for one Resident (Resident #71), of twenty-four residents reviewed for call light access. Resident #71's call light was placed out of reach of Resident #71 while in bed. This failure could place residents on at risk for not being able to call for assistance from staff. The findings were: Record review of Resident #71's admission Record, dated 04/22/25, revealed Resident #71 was [AGE] year-old hospice resident and was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #71's diagnoses included encephalopathy (any disease or disorder of the brain, specifically one that causes dysfunction), dementia (a group of thinking and social symptoms that interferes with daily functioning), cerebral infarction (stroke), type 2 diabetes mellitus (happens when the body cannot use insulin correctly and sugar builds up in the blood), and congestive heart…
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 · D2025-04-24 · 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 interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure the assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 (Resident #79) of 6 residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The facility failed to identify Resident #79 was receiving Dialysis on his Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE]. This failure could place residents at risk for receiving inadequate care and services based on inaccurate assessments. The findings included: Record review of Resident #79's admission record dated 03/05/25 reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of Dependence on Renal Dialysis, End Stage Renal Disease (a long-term condition where the kidneys gradually lose their ability to filter waste products from the blood), and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (a disease that occurs when your blood glucose, also called blood sugar, was too high). Record review of Resident #79's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed: BIMS score of 03 indicating Resident #79 was severely cognitively…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-24 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who needed respiratory care were provided such care consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences for 1 of 5 (Resident #22) residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #22's oxygen was administered at the correct setting of 2 liters per minute on 04/22/2025 as ordered by the physician. This deficient practice could place residents who receive respiratory care at an increased risk of developing respiratory complications and a decreased quality of care. The findings included: Record review of Resident #22's admission record dated 04/22/2025 reflected an [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 10/01/2019. Pertinent diagnoses included Shortness of Breath, Muscle Wasting and Atrophy (loss of muscle tissue), Alzheimer's Disease (a brain disorder that slowly destroys memory and thinking…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program, designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections, for one resident (Resident #37) of 1 observed for incontinent care, in that: CNA A did not use one wipe per swipe on the penile area during incontinent care on Resident #37. This failure could place residents at risk for infections and cross contamination. The findings included: Record review of Resident #37's admission Record, dated 04/22/25, revealed Resident #37 was 87 years-old hospice resident and was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #37's diagnoses included type 2 diabetes mellitus (happens when the body cannot use insulin correctly and sugar builds up in the blood), Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (a group of lung diseases that cause airflow obstruction and breathing problems), atrial…
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 before2025-03-20 · 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 one resident (Resident #1) of 1 observed for incontinent care, in that: CNA A did not use one wipe per swipe on the buttock area during incontinent care on Resident #1. This failure could place residents at risk for infections and cross contamination. The findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet dated 03/18/25, reflected a [AGE] year old female admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included nontraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage (bleeding into the substance of the brain in the absence of trauma or surgery), anoxic brain damage (damage or death of brain cells due to lack of oxygen), spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy (a movement disorder where the muscles of all four limbs…
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 before2024-06-10 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that are complete and accurately documented for 2 of 4 Residents (Resident #2, Resident #3) reviewed for medical records accuracy, in that: 1.Resident #2's June 2024 Medication Administration Record documentation record was incomplete. Staff did not document or sign off on the administration of physician ordered insulin. 2.Resident #3's June 2024 Medication Administration Record documentation record was incomplete. Staff did not document or sign off on the administration of physician ordered insulin. This deficient practice could affect residents whose records are maintained by the facility and could place them at risk for errors in care, and treatment. The findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #2's face sheet, dated 06/10/24, revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included:…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-10 · 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, record review, and interview, 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 #2 and Resident #5 and Resident #6) that were reviewed for infection control and transmission-based precautions policies and practices, in that: 1. CNA C failed to don the appropriate PPE before he entered Resident #2's room. These failures could place residents at risk for infection through cross-contamination of pathogens and infectious diseases. The findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #2's face sheet, dated 06/10/24, revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: COVID-19 (Contagious respiratory disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2), type 2 diabetes mellitus 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 before2024-02-17 · 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 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 two residents (Resident #85 and Resident #91) of four residents observed for infection control issues, in that: 1. The CNA A and CNA B did not wash their hands for a minimum of 20 seconds while performing incontinent care on Resident #85. 2. The CNA D removed her dirty gloves and applied clean gloves without sanitizing hands between glove changes while performing incontinet care on Resident #91. These deficient practices could place residents at-risk for infection due to improper care practices. The findings were: 1. Record review of Resident #85's admission Record, dated 02/17/24, revealed a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: End stage renal disease (or kidney failure, occurs when 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 before2024-02-17 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving neglect, were reported immediately to the State Survey Agency, not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury, for for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #39) reviewed for abuse/neglect. The facility did not report Resident #39's had an unwitnessed fall on 01/27/24. Resident #39's lying on the floor next to the toilet and her head in the bathroom shower. This failure could place all residents at increased risk for potential abuse to unreported allegations of abuse and neglect. The findings included: Record review of Resident #39's file reflected an [AGE] year-old female, with an original admission date of 01/17/2022. Her diagnoses included: Osteoporosis (bones become weak and brittle) left knee, history of falling, contusion (a bruise from the result of a direct blow or impact, such as a fall) of other part of head, fall on same level,…
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 · D2024-02-17 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure incontinent bladder residents received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections and restore continence to the extent possible for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #85) reviewed for quality of care, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #85's indwelling catheter was not pulled or tugged on during incontinent care that would cause pain or discomfort. This failure could place residents at risk for discomfort, urethral trauma (injury to the duct in which urine is transported out of the body from the bladder), and urinary tract infections due to improper care. The findings were: 1. Record review of Resident #85's face sheet, dated 02/17/24, revealed a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: End stage renal disease (or kidney failure, occurs when the kidneys can no longer support the body's needs), dialysis (a procedure to remove waste products and excess fluid 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 before2024-02-17 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care was provided with professional standards of practice for 1 of 3 residents (Resident # 103) reviewed for quality of care in that: Resident #103's oxygen was administered at 2.5 Liters Per Minute instead of 3 Liters Per Minute via trach mask as ordered by physician. This failure could place residents who receive respiratory care at risk of developing respiratory complications and a decreased qualify of care. The findings included: Record review of Resident #103's face sheet dated 02/17/24, reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male who was initially admitted on [DATE]. Resident #103's relevant diagnoses were generalized epilepsy, quadriplegia (form of paralysis that affects all four limbs plus torso), diabetes, meningitis, hydrocephalus (excess fluid build-up in fluid-containing cavities of the brain), hypertension, acute respiratory failure, tracheostomy ( a hole that surgeons make through 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 · D2024-02-17 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolatedImplement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were given psychotropic medications to treat specific diagnoses for 1 (Resident #22) of 5 Residents, reviewed for pharmacy services in that: The facility failed to ensure that Resident #22 did not receive an antipsychotic (Risperdal/risperidone) that was not necessary to treat Vascular Dementia. This failure could affect residents who received medications in the facility and put them at risk for adverse consequences such as impairment or decline in an individual's mental or physical condition or functional or psychosocial status. The findings included: Record review of Resident #22's face sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 01/24/2024 and original admission date of 05/21/2014. Her diagnosis were Vascular Dementia, Parkinson's, Acute Kidney Failure, Dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Bipolar disorder, Cerebrovascular Disease (a group of conditions that affect blood flow in 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 before2024-02-17 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure 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 or food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for sanitation in that: 1. The facility failed to ensure equipment was clean and sanitized 2. The facility failed to maintain cleanliness of the floor in the kitchen These failures could place residents at risk of foodborne illnesses. The findings included: An observation of the kitchen on 02/13/2024 at 8:45 a.m. revealed the floor behind the stove, oven, and fryer had debris behind it. The kitchen's hand washing sinks had a whitish substance adhered to the faucets, and backsplash. The seal around the strainers had a rusty color. The faucets spout had a whitish, and brownish substance around it. The fryer had a white substance adhered to the side and front panels. The oven had a whitish substance adhered the front and side panels. The oven doors had a thick brown substance adhered to them. The paper towel dispenser had a thick brown film on top and on the front panel. 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 before2024-02-17 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolatedSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure medical records were accurately documented, for one Resident (Resident #39) of six residents reviewed for accuracy of medical records. The facility failed to document Resident #39's falls in the Progress Notes. This failure could place all residents with falls at risk of not receiving adequate care and services. The findings were: Record review of Resident #39's admission Record file reflected an [AGE] year-old female, with an original admission date of 01/17/2022. Her diagnoses included: Osteoporosis (bones become weak and brittle) left knee, history of falling, contusion (a bruise from the result of a direct blow or impact, such as a fall) of other part of head, fall on same level, hypertension (high blood pressure), dementia (condition characterized by progressive or persistent loss of intellectual functioning, especially with impairment of memory and abstract thinking, and often with personality change), cognitive communication deficit…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-02-09 · 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 receive such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person -centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences, for 4 of 5 residents (R #2, R #3, R #4, R #5) reviewed for care plans, in that: The facility did not follow R #2, R #3, R #4, and R #5's care plans which indicated to obtain monthly labs from dialysis center and place in the resident's chart every day shift every 30 days. The facility failed to obtain the labs for the following months: September 2023-January 2024 for R #2, November 2020-November 2023 and January 2024 for R #3, July 2023 and August 2023 for R #4, January 2023-April 2023, and June 2023-December 2023 for R #5. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the care and services as indicated in the comprehensive care plans. The findings included: Record review of R #2's face sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old female with original…
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 before2024-01-12 · 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, or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source were reported immediately to the State Survey Agency, within two hours, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury for 1 resident (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for abuse/neglect, The facility did not report the allegation of resident abuse to the State Survey Agency within the allotted time frame for Resident #1 who had been administered CBD and THC oil by FM I. This failure could place all residents at increased risk for potential abuse due to unreported allegations of abuse and neglect. The findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 01/10/2024 reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to facility on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-01-12 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to review Resident #1's progress notes after NP C documented on progress notes on 12/20/23 that FM I was interested in administering CBD to Resident #1. This failure could place residents at risk of experiencing unmanaged pain, a decreased quality of life, and hospitalization. The findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 01/10/2024 reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to facility on 11/17/2023, relevant diagnoses were cerebral infarction (disrupted blood flow to the brain), congestive heart failure (when the heart does not pump blood as well as it should), tracheostomy (a hole that surgeons make through the front of the neck and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-15 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
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 services provided, met professional standard of quality for 1 (Resident #1) of 5 residents reviewed for professional standards. The facility failed to implement Resident #1's physician's order for treatment of her right arm blisters. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the care and services ordered by the physician and a decline in health status. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 09/11/23 reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including quadriplegia (paralysis of all four limbs), other skin changes, type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications (high blood sugar), essential (primary) hypertension (high blood pressure), pressure ulcer of sacral region, stage 4 (skin injury near the lower back and spine), personal history of transient ischemic attack (stroke that only last a few minutes/Interruption of blood supply to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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
$54,998 in federal fines across 2 penalties.
- $16,442 — penalty dated 2025-07-16
- $38,556 — penalty dated 2024-01-12
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 HAMILTON COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT — 10 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 | 2.3 | -1.3 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.1 | -1.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 3.6 | -0.6 vs chain |
The other 9 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.3★, per CMS)
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| GARZA, JENNIFER | Individual | W-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE | since 03/01/2023 |
| HOOPER, GRADY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 03/01/2023 |
| PHARR SKILLED NURSING LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 03/01/2023 |
| SCHEINER, ELIEZER | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 03/01/2023 |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — 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.
About 77% 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. This home reported $489K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in TX
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Texas Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-09-01 — CMS provider number 675044. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-06-25, 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.