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

Red Oak Health and Rehabilitation Center

101 Reese Dr., Red Oak, TX 75154 · For profit - Corporation · 144 certified beds · (469) 552-0500 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (469) 552-0500 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited Mar 20241 actual-harm citation$12,035 in federal fines
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • 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
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (17) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $12,035 in federal fines (most recent 2024-03-28)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (69%) runs well above the national median (45%)

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Urgent care / clinic
105 Harris Ave · (972) 617-0034 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
CVS Photo0.2 mi
105 Harris Ave · (972) 617-0034 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
Park
Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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 1 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 1 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased6.1%15.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.8%3.0%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.3%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%0.8%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%2.4%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.8%3.3%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened2.6%14.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication14.5%18.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers0.7%3.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control14.8%13.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table5.6%9.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.7%88.0%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission26.8%25.7%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit17.2%12.3%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.282.171.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days4.162.061.80worse

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

37.9% 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 36 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

37.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.9%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
40.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.28U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.10hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.13hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 40.9% 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 22 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 0.28 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 43% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 15% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF37.9%CMS range 23.1–54.251.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.9%CMS range 8.1–15.310.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge40.9%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge50.0%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge36.4%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay3.7%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.821.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

0.42
RN hours/ resident / day
0.71
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.80
Aide hours/ resident / day
2.93
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.35
RN hoursweekends
68.9%
Total nursing turnover
61.1%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 144 beds and averages 107.0 residents a day — about 74% occupied, or roughly 37 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 2.93 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.42 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.80 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.59 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.07 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.45 to 0.35 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 69% is well above 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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-03-13)
5
at the previous standard inspection (2025-01-15)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

17 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 6 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Actual harm · G2024-03-28 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide 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 interviews and record review the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and to prevent accidents for one resident (Resident #1) of four reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility failed to supervise Resident #1 when she was sitting at the nurse's station, which resulted in a fall with injuries on [DATE]. This failure placed residents at risk of accidents or falls resulting in injuries, pain, and hospitalization. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Chronic Kidney Disease, Dementia, Anemia (low iron in blood), Hyperlipidemia (high cholesterol), Glaucoma (eye disorder that clouds vision) and muscle weakness. Review of Resident #1's admission MDS dated [DATE] reflected a BIMS of zero (0) suggesting severe cognitive impairment. Review of MDS section Functional Abilities and Goals reflected resident used a wheelchair for a mobility device. Further review of this MDS section reflected…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-06-26 · tag F0637 — isolated
    Assess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
    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 complete a significant change MDS assessment within 14 days after a significant change of condition for 1 of 6 (Resident #1) residents reviewed for comprehensive assessments.The facility did not complete a significant change MDS for Resident #1 after he was transferred to another hospice services on 06/04/2026.This failure could place residents at risk of not having their individual needs met when a significant change in condition occurs.Findings included:Review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 06/26/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses included malignant (likely to worsen or spread) neoplasm (abnormal and uncontrolled growth of tissue) of lower lobe (bottom sections of lung) left bronchus (airway passage) or lung, hypertension (high blood pressure), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (lung disease that restricts airflow and makes breathing difficult).Review of Resident #1's care plan dated…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-03-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food safety in the facility's only kitchen reviewed for dietary services.The facility failed to ensure food was safely stored, labeled, and dated in the walk-in refrigerator on 03/11/2026.The facility failed to ensure food was safely stored, labeled, and dated in the kitchen pantry on 03/11/2026.These failures have the potential to affect the residents who ate food from the facility's kitchen, placing them at risk of foodborne illness. Findings include:Observation of the kitchen pantry on 03/11/2026 at 9:28 AM revealed:1.One plastic bag with a box of quick creamy wheat. There was no 'open date or 'use by date' documented.2. One gallon of BBQ sauce with an open date of 03/02/2026. There was no 'use by date documented.3. One opened gallon of apple cider vinegar with an 'open date' of 09/15/2025. There was no 'use by date' documented.4. One opened gallon of soy sauce with a date of 10/09 and an open date of 11/03/2026. There…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-03-13 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biological were stored in locked compartments for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #111) reviewed for medications storage. During medications administration, MA A left Resident #111 without ensuring medications were swallowed. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of misappropriation of medications or harm due to accidental ingestion of medications.The findings included: Record review of Resident #111's face sheet, dated 03/13/26, reflected an admission date of 06/16/23, with diagnoses which included: cerebral infarction (a pathologic process that results in an area of necrotic tissue in the brain), hypertension (high blood pressure), atrial fibrillation (a common heart arrhythmia that causes the upper chambers of the heart to beat irregularly and often rapidly), and dementia (a general name for a decline in cognitive abilities that impacts a person's ability to perform everyday activities). 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-01-15 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored properly for 1of 2 medication storage rooms (room located by hall 400) and 2 of 2 medication carts (Hall 400 Medication Aide's Cart and Hall 400 Nurse's Cart). 1. The facility failed to ensure expired medication administration supplies and Covid test were removed from 1 of 2 medication storage rooms (room located by hall 400). 2. The facility failed to follow policy and date opened medications on 2 of 2 medication carts (Hall 400 Medication Aide's Cart and Hall 400 Nurse's Cart). These failures could place residents at risk for ineffective treatments, incorrect diagnosis, cause a Peripheral IV Catheter to need replacement and or allow Covid infections to spread. Findings include: Observation on [DATE] at 12:23 PM of the 400 hall Medication Aide's Cart revealed the following medications were opened, but no date showed when they were opened: 1 Bottle of Geri Care-One daily…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-01-15 · tag F0802 — failed to prepare enough nourishing food — pattern
    Provide sufficient support personnel to safely and effectively carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service.
    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 employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, taking into consideration resident assessments, individual plans of care and the number, acuity and diagnoses of the facility's resident population in accordance with the facility assessment for five (5) staff reviewed for qualified dietary staff. The facility failed to ensure that dietary DS B, DS D, DS E, DS G, and DS H obtained and/or maintained their Texas Food Handler Certificates. This failure practice could place residents who ate from the facility's only kitchen at risk of foodborne illness and not having their nutritional needs met and at risk of contracting foodborne illnesses. Finding Include: Record review of the dietary staff personnel files completed on January 15, 2025, at 2:41 PM, revealed the following: DM's hire date to be 12/9/2024. DS F's hire date to be 11/28/2023. DS G's hire date to be 12/20/2024. DS H's hire date to be 7/10/24. Texas Food Manager Safety…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-01-15 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    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 safety for one (1) of one (1) facility kitchen and one (1) of two (2) nourishment rooms reviewed for food safety (Station 2 Med Room). 1. The facility failed to ensure food items in the kitchen refrigerator were dated and labeled. 2. The facility failed to ensure the ice machine in the kitchen and in one (1) of two (2) nourishment rooms were cleaned and free of mold, mildew and slime. 3. The facility failed to discard a dented can. 4. The facility failed to discard food items past their expiration date. 5. The facility failed to maintain accurate freezer temperature logs for the freezer in the kitchen and one (1) of two (2) freezers in the nourishment rooms (Station 2 Med Room). 6. The facility failed to keep food properly sealed and covered in the refrigerator. 7. The facility failed to provide a thermometer for the measurement of the freezer…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-01-15 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure comprehensive care plans were reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team including both the comprehensive and quarterly review assessments for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #20) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #20's comprehensive care plan was revised to reflect the need for and the use of a fall mat. This failure could place the residents at risk of not receiving the appropriate care and services to maintain their highest practical well-being. Finding include: Record review of Resident #20's Face Sheet revealed an eighty-two (82) year old female who was, admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included essential (primary) hypertension (high blood pressure), type 2 diabetes mellitus with unspecified conditions (a chronic condition characterized by insulin resistance and elevated blood sugar levels), hyperlipidemia (high cholesterol), unspecified dementia (a decline in cognitive…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-01-15 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #36) reviewed for infection control. CNA A failed to wash or sanitize her hands while going from a dirty to clean surface while performing incontinent care on 01/14/25 at 1:30 PM for Resident #36. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for cross contamination and the spread of infection. Findings include: Record review of Resident #36's care plan, dated 11/13/24, reflected: Resident #36 was incontinent of bowel and bladder. Goal: Risk for septicemia will be minimized/prevented via prompt recognition and treatment of symptoms of UTI. To be clean, dry and odor free. Interventions: Check for incontinence during rounds; wash, rinse, dry perineum, and change clothing PRN after…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-11-21 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled and stored in accordance with professional standards for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure MA A secured Resident 1's medication when she left Resident #1's medications on her bedside table for her to self-administer and did not ensure the resident took her medication. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving drugs and biologicals as needed, medication errors, medication misuse, and drug diversion. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female, admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included cerebral infarction (Stroke a disruption of the blood flow to the brain causing part of the brain to die), dehydration, post-traumatic stress syndrome, unspecified psychosis, and anxiety disorder. Record review of Resident #1's care…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-07-17 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
    Reasonably 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 observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents received services in the facility with reasonable accommodations of resident's needs and preferences except when to do so would endanger the health and safety of the resident or other residents for 2 of 9 residents (Residents #1 and #2) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 and #2's call lights were within reach on 07/17/24. This failure could place residents at risk of needs not being met. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's admission Record dated 07/17/24 revealed a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia (a syndrome associated with many neurodegenerative diseases, characterized by a general decline in cognitive abilities that affects a person's ability to perform everyday activities), anxiety (an emotion which is characterized by an inner turmoil and includes feelings of dread over anticipated events), seizures…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 6 citations
  • Potential for harm · D2024-07-17 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to have all residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive care plan, for 1 of 7 (Resident # 1) residents reviewed for care. The facility failed to provide a clean comfortable environment for Resident #1 by allowing him to lay in a soiled bed . This failure could place residents at risk for further skin integrity impairment, untreated medical issues, and diminished quality of care. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's admission Record dated 07/17/24 revealed a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia (a syndrome associated with many neurodegenerative diseases, characterized by a general decline in cognitive abilities that affects a person's ability to perform everyday activities), anxiety (an emotion which is characterized by an inner turmoil and includes feelings of dread over anticipated events), seizures…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-28 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely 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 abuse or neglect, including injuries of unknown source, were e reported immediately, or not later than 24 hours to other officials (including to the State Survey Agency) in accordance with State law through established procedures for one (1) resident (Resident #1) of seven (7) residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility failed to report Resident #1's fall on [DATE], which resulted in a head injury, in a timely manner to the State. This failure could place residents at risk for abuse, neglect, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Chronic Kidney Disease, Dementia, Anemia (low iron in blood), Hyperlipidemia (high cholesterol), Glaucoma (eye disorder that clouds vision) and muscle weakness. Review of Resident #1's admission MDS assessment dated [DATE]…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-12-01 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for one of one kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation. 1. The facility failed to ensure Dietary [NAME] E and Dietary Aide F wore a hair restraint while in the kitchen. 2. The facility failed to properly label and date leftover food in one of one walk-in refrigerator. 3. The facility failed to ensure Dietary [NAME] E properly sanitized her hands between tasks. These failures could place residents who were served from the kitchen at risk for health complications, foodborne illnesses, and decreased quality of life. Findings included: 1. Observation on 11/29/2023 between 8:30 AM - 9:00 AM revealed Dietary [NAME] E was standing over clean dishes, and food in a pan on the food prep table. She turned and began walking to the kitchen door leading to the dining room when surveyor entered the kitchen. Dietary [NAME] E had her hair pinned to the top of her head; however, she was not wearing a hair net. Observation 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-12-01 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for four of twenty-one (Resident # 41, Resident #45, Resident #50, and Resident #51) reviewed for ADL's. The facility failed to ensure Resident # 41's, Resident # 45's, Resident # 50's, and Resident # 51's fingernails were trimmed and cleaned. These failures could place residents at risk for poor hygiene, dignity issues and decreased quality of life. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #45's face sheet, dated 11/30/2023, reflected an 67 -year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included type one diabetes mellitus with ketoacidosis without coma, (develops when your body does not have enough insulin to allow blood sugar into your cells for use as energy), muscle weakness (when full effort does not produce a normal muscle movement) and, unspecified…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-12-01 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolated
    Keep 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 observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to respect the residents' right to personal privacy of medical records and medical treatment for 3 of 10 Residents (Residents #70, #94 and #46) reviewed for privacy. The facility failed to ensure LVN C protected confidential resident healthcare information for Residents #70, #94, and #46 by leaving the information uncovered on a yellow paper tablet on top of her medication cart. This failure could place residents at risk of personal information being exposed to unauthorized persons, loss of dignity, and low self-esteem. Findings included: Record review of Resident #70's Face Sheet reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with a diagnoses of Anoxic Brain Injury (brain cell damage due to lack of blood flow or decrease in oxygenation), Cardiac Arrest (sudden loss of heart function that leads to a lack of oxygen and nutrients reaching the brain and other tissues), Obstructive…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-11-05 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
    Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to serve food that was palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature for 1 of (1) kitchen reviewed. The facility failed to ensure meals were served hot and at a safe appetizing temperature. This failure could place residents at risk of reduced quality of life, weight loss, and food-borne illness. Findings included: During an observation on 11-05-2023 at 12:25 PM, tray cart was observed on hall 200 full of plates and not passed out to residents. During an observation on 11-05-2023 at 12:25 PM, tray cart was observed on hall 300 full of plates and not passed out to residents. During an observation on 11-05-2023 at 12:54 PM, a couple of food trays were still observed needing to be passed to residents. During an observation on 11-05-2023 at 12:55 PM, Resident #2 attempted to eat food but returned to CNA C after being delivered cold. Resident # 2 stated to CNA C he was not able to eat cold food like that. During an observation on 11-05-2023 at 1:35 PM, surveyor temperature checks were done Resident…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

$12,035 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $12,035 — penalty dated 2024-03-28

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 HMG HEALTHCARE — 31 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 53.1-0.1 vs chain
Health inspection 4 of 52.8+1.2 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 51.8-0.8 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 54.4-1.4 vs chain
The other 30 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.1★, per CMS)
1 of 5Deerbrook Skilled Nursing and Rehab CenterHumble, TX 1 of 5Park Manor of Cypress StationHouston, TX 1 of 5Silver SpringAbilene, TX 1 of 5Smoky Hill Rehabilitation CenterSalina, KS 1 of 5Tanglewood Nursing & RehabilitationTopeka, KS 1 of 5Treviso Transitional CareLongview, TX 2 of 5Accel at College StationCollege Station, TX 2 of 5Park Manor Of TomballTomball, TX 2 of 5Park Manor of Quail ValleyMissouri City, TX 2 of 5Park Manor of WestchaseHouston, TX 3 of 5Arbrook PlazaArlington, TX 3 of 5Cimarron Place Health & RehabilitationCorpus Christi, TX 3 of 5Forum Parkway Health & RehabilitationBedford, TX 3 of 5Green Oaks Nursing & RehabilitationArlington, TX 3 of 5Hewitt Nursing And RehabilitationHewitt, TX 3 of 5Methodist Transitional Care Center-Desoto LLCDesoto, TX 3 of 5Willowbrook Nursing CenterNacogdoches, TX 4 of 5Friendship Haven Healthcare And Rehabilitation CenFriendswood, TX 4 of 5Gulf Pointe PlazaRockport, TX 4 of 5Mission Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterMission, TX 4 of 5Park Manor Of HumbleHumble, TX 4 of 5Park Manor Of South BeltHouston, TX 4 of 5Park Manor Of The WoodlandsThe Woodlands, TX 5 of 5Crowley Nursing And RehabilitationCrowley, TX 5 of 5Harbor Lakes Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterGranbury, TX 5 of 5Holland Lake Rehabilitation And Wellness CenterWeatherford, TX 5 of 5Park Manor Of CyfairHouston, TX 5 of 5Pecan Bayou Nursing And RehabilitationBrownwood, TX 5 of 5Stallings Court Nursing and RehabilitationNacogdoches, TX 5 of 5Stonegate Nursing And RehabilitationFort Worth, TX

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 / managerTypeRoleSince
STRAMECKI, ANTHONYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/01/2016
VRATIS, KACEYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/01/2020
MURRELL, EDWARDIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 11/01/2012
ROLLO, JEFFERYIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 11/01/2012
HMG PARK MANOR OF RED OAK LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 10/01/2021
CULP, ROLANDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2021
DASPIT, LAURENCEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2021
PRINCE, DEREKIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2021
WAY, GEORGEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2013

CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 9 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$9.6M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-1.7%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 81%Medicare 2%Other / private 16%

About 81% 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.

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

$255per resident / day
operating cost
$7,737per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$250per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

What families pay in TX

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 675431. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-13, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next