The Reserve At Richardson
1610 Richardson Dr, Richardson, TX 75080 · Government - Hospital district · 129 certified beds · (972) 600-8219 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (34% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited May 2026
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- inspectors recorded 1 serious finding as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (35) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $14,069 in federal fines (most recent 2025-03-10)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
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 | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 4 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 | 4 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 4 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 3 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 | 17.2% | 15.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 1.1% | 3.0% | 5.4% | better |
| 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 | 0.9% | 0.8% | 2.0% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 2.4% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star 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 | 0.0% | 3.3% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 10.4% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 24.3% | 18.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.0% | 3.8% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 13.5% | 13.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 2.1% | 9.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.4% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 88.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 26.7% | 25.7% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 12.3% | 12.3% | 12.0% | typical |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.68 | 2.17 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 2.74 | 2.06 | 1.80 | worse |
* 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.
51.2% 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 73 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 69.0% 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 58 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: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.
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 | 51.2%CMS range 40.0–60.2 | 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 | 9.4%CMS range 6.3–14.0 | 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 | 69.0% | 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 | 63.8% | 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 | 58.6% | 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 | 100.0% | 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 | 97.6% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.1% | 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 | 3.2% | 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 | 6.3%CMS range 3.3–11.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.28 | 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 129 beds and averages 79.6 residents a day — about 62% occupied, or roughly 49 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.49 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.23 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.21 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 3.22 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.60 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.20 to 0.29 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 34% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
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.
35 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 24 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-03-10 · 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, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident received adequate supervision to prevent Resident #1's accidents from an elopement for (Resident #1) 1 of 6 residents reviewed for wandering, elopement, accidents, hazards, and supervision. On 01/26/2025, the facility failed to identify potential hazards and follow internal systems in place for Resident #1 to prevent her from exiting thru unlocked doors located in the dining area leading to a corridor land fire exit door which connected to a stairwell where she experienced an unwitnessed fall down the stairs and sustained multiple serious injuries that included right wrist and extensive facial fractures. A Past Non-Compliance Immediate Jeopardy (PNC IJ) was identified and presented to the Administrator and DON on 03/10/2025 at 3:30 PM. The noncompliance began on 01/26/2025 and ended on 02/02/2025. The facility corrected the noncompliance before the investigation began. This failure could place residents at the facility at…
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 · E2026-05-21 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — patternHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
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 provide a private meeting space for the residents' monthly council meetings for 11 of 11 confidential residents reviewed for resident council.The facility failed to provide a private space for resident council meetings. This failure could place residents who attended the resident council meetings at risk of not being able to voice concerns due to lack of privacy. Observation and interview on 05/20/2026 at 11:30 a.m. during a confidential resident group meeting held in a private therapy gym, revealed the meeting was normally held in the upstairs dining room. There were no doors or solid walls that separated the dining room from the open nurses' station or the two hallways leading into the dining room. The residents stated they did not feel they could express their opinions because staff would be able to hear them and that anyone could walk in and out of the dining room area. An interview on 05/20/2026 at 12:20 p.m. with the Activity Director revealed she had been hired in September of 2025 and that she knew the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-05-21 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — patternEnsure 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, in accordance with State and Federal laws, store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments under proper temperature controls, and permitted only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for six of twenty residents (Residents #29, #44, #70, #74, #78, and #86) and one of three carts (Nurse Cart) reviewed for medication storage. 1.The facility failed to ensure that Resident #78's eye drops were not accessible to other residents on 05/19/2026. 2.The facility failed to ensure that Resident #70 analgesic topical gel was not inside his room on 05/19/2026. 3.The facility failed to ensure that Resident #86 did not have a tube of zinc oxide inside her room on 05/19/2026. 4.The facility failed to ensure that Resident #29 did not have a tube of zinc oxide inside his room on 05/19/2026. 5.The facility failed to ensure that Resident #44 did not have an antifungal powder tube inside her room on 05/19/2026. 6.The facility failed to ensure…
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 before2026-05-21 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure food was stored, prepared, distributed, and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to ensure all food items in the facility's kitchen were dated and discarded prior to their use-by date and were properly sealed. These failures could place residents at risk of food contamination and food-borne illness.Finding included: An observation on 05/19/26 between 9:15 AM and 9:45 AM in the facility's kitchen revealed:One gallon bag containing pasta noodles with an expiration date of 05/17, not properly sealed and exposed to air contaminants. One gallon bag containing two graham pie crusts was undated and revealed no expiration date. One gallon bag containing three graham pie crusts was undated and revealed no expiration date. One bag containing brown sugar dated 05/15/26 with no visible expiration date. One head of lettuce dated 05/18/26 with no visible expiration date was observed. One gallon bag…
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 before2026-05-21 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for four of twenty residents (Residents #11, #46, #51,and #87) reviewed for infection control. 1.The facility failed to ensure LVN C performed hand hygiene when she suctioned, changed the tracheostomy's inner cannula, changed the g-tube's dressing, and changed Resident #11's feeding formula on 05/20/2026. 2.The facility failed to ensure CNA D wore a gown while changing Resident #46's linen, who had a midline IV (a thin tube inserted into the vein for delivery of medications) and pressure ulcer, on 05/19/2026. 3.The facility failed to ensure CNA D and the DOR wore gowns and performed hand hygiene when they performed Resident #51's incontinent care, who had an open wound, on 05/19/2026. 4.The facility failed to ensure…
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 before2026-05-21 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to treat each resident with respect, dignity, and care in a manner and environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for one (Resident #87) of nineteen residents reviewed for dignity. The facility failed to treat Resident #87 with dignity and promote enhancement of their quality of life when the resident was not provided a privacy bag for her catheter bag on 05/20/2026. This failure could place the residents at risk of not having their right to a dignified existence maintained.Findings included: Record review of Resident #87's Face Sheet, dated 05/21/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old female re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder (the muscles and nerves that control the bladder do not work properly due to illness). Record review of Resident #87's Comprehensive MDS Assessment (assessment used to determine functional capabilities 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 · D2026-05-21 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to be free from abuse, neglect, misappropriation of resident property, and exploitation for two of ten residents (Resident #54 and Resident #6) reviewed for abuse and neglect.The facility failed to ensure Resident #6 was free from abuse when Resident #54 hit him on 05/05/2026. This failure could place residents at risk of abuse and emotional stress.Findings include:Record review Resident #54's face sheet revealed a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnosis included: Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis following nontraumatic subarachnoid, Hemorrhage affecting right dominant side (a type of hemorrhagic stroke indicate damage to the brain. Because the brain's hemispheres control the opposite side of the body, right-sided motor symptoms stem from left-brain injury), Vascular dementia, severe, without behavioral disturbance (indicates advanced cognitive impairment that severely impacts independence…
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 · D2026-05-21 · 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 abuse were reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, if the events that caused the allegation involved abuse, to the administrator of the facility and to other officials including to the State Survey Agency where state law provides for jurisdiction in long-term care facilities in accordance with State law through established procedures for 2 of 4 residents (Residents #54, and #6) reviewed for freedom from abuse, neglect, and exploitation.The facility failed to report an allegation of resident abuse for Resident #6 to the State Survey Agency within the allotted time frame of 2 hours, after being advised of the incident occurrence on 05/05/26 when Resident #54 admitted to striking Resident #6.These failures could put the residents at risk of abuse, allegations of abuse not being reported immediately, and could result in physical and psychosocial harm. Findings…
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 · D2026-05-21 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolatedRespond appropriately to all alleged violations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to have evidence that all allegations of abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, were thoroughly investigated for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #6) reviewed for abuse and neglect.The facility was made aware of the incident on 05/05/2026 and did not investigate an allegation of abuse which Resident #6 was struck on the leg by Resident #54. This failure could place residents at risk for abuse/neglect and could lead to a diminished quality of life and psychosocial harm.Record review Resident #54's face sheet revealed a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnosis included: Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis following nontraumatic subarachnoid. Hemorrhage affecting right dominant side. (a type of hemorrhagic stroke indicate damage to the brain. Because the brain's hemispheres control the opposite side of the body, right-sided motor symptoms stem from left-brain injury). Vascular dementia, severe, without behavioral disturbance.…
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 before2026-05-21 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that the residents' environment remained free of hazards as was possible for one of eighteen residents (Resident #87) and one direct care staff (LVN B) of three direct care staff reviewed for accident hazard. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA E did not transfer Resident #87 using a Hoyer lift (a mechanical lift used to transfer an individual with limited mobility) by herself, and leave the resident suspended in the air via the Hoyer lift without supervision on 05/20/2026. 2. The facility failed to ensure LVN B did not leave a container of germicidal wipes (substance that destroys germs and microorganism) on top of her cart unattended on 05/20/2026. These failures could place residents at risk of injuries and exposure to toxic chemicals. Findings included: 1.Record review of Resident #87's Face Sheet, dated 05/21/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old female re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed 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 · Dcited before2026-05-21 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who were incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infection for two of five residents (Resident #3 and Resident #87) reviewed for incontinent care. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #3's catheter bag was off the floor on 05/19/2026. 2. The facility failed to ensure that CNA E did not place Resident #87's catheter bag on top of the resident's bed, rendering the catheter to not be below the bladder while changing the resident's clothing on 05/20/2026. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #87's catheter bag was off the floor on 05/20/2026. These failures could place the residents at risk for urinary tract infection. Findings included: 1.Record review of Resident #3's Face Sheet, dated 05/21/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with neuromuscular dysfunction of the bladder. Record review of Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 24 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-21 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolatedEnsure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
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 appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding for one of four residents (Resident #85) reviewed for feeding tube management. The facility failed to ensure LVN B checked Resident #85's gastric residual and g-tube placement before flushing and administering medications on 05/20/2026. This failure could place residents with g-tubes at risk for tube displacement, clogging, aspiration, and discomfort.Findings included: Record review of Resident #85's Face Sheet, dated 05/21/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with gastrostomy status (having done a surgical procedure that creates artificial opening into the stomach to provide nutritional support). Record review of Resident #85's Comprehensive MDS Assessment, dated 05/15/2026, reflected that the resident had severe impairment in cognition with a BIMS score of 00. The Comprehensive MDS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-21 · 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 needed respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for two of ten residents (Residents #46 and Resident #87) reviewed for respiratory care. 1.The facility failed to ensure Resident #46's nasal cannula was stored properly when not in use on 05/21/2026.2.The facility failed to ensure Resident #87's nasal cannula (flexible tube used to deliver oxygen to the nose through two prongs) was stored properly when not in use on 05/20/2026. These failures could place residents at risk for respiratory infection and not having their respiratory needs met.Findings included: 1.Record review of Resident #46's Face Sheet, dated 05/21/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with shortness of breath. Record review of Resident #46's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-21 · 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 provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for one of ten residents (Resident #67) reviewed for pharmaceutical services. The facility failed to dispose of Resident #67's expired insulin on 05/21/2026. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the medication's full therapeutic benefits and not receiving medications as ordered resulting to adverse effects.Findings included: Record review of Resident #67's Face Sheet, dated 05/21/2026, reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with diabetes mellitus (high blood sugar). Record review of Resident #67's Comprehensive MDS Assessment, dated 04/01/2026, reflected that the resident was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15. The Comprehensive MDS Assessment indicated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-05-21 · 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 observation, interview and record review, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident that are complete; accurately documented; readily accessible; and systematically organized for for 2 (Resident #20 and Resident #66) of 5 residents reviewed for Advanced Directives. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #20 and Resident #66's OOH-DNR (Out of Hospital-Do Not Resuscitate) were completed correctly with both signatures not meeting the criteria for a qualified witness, making the forms invalid. This failure could affect all residents who have implemented an Advanced Directive and established their choice not to be resuscitated at the risk of receiving CPR (Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation) against their wishes.Findings included: Record review of Resident #20's face sheet dated [DATE] reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnosis included unspecified dementia, (a clear…
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 · D2025-12-02 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident had a right to confidentiality of his or her personal and medical records for one (Resident #1's) of ten residents reviewed for privacy and confidentiality. The facility failed to ensure ADON A did not leave Residents #1's medical information exposed and unattended on top of the nurse's station countertop on 12/02/2025. This failure could place the residents at risk of their medical information being accessed by unauthorized individuals.Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet, dated 12/02/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with depression (persistent feeling of sadness or loss of interest). Record review of Resident #1's Comprehensive MDS (assessment used to determine functional capabilities and health needs) Assessment, dated 11/30/2025, reflected the resident was unable to complete the interview to determine the BIMS (screening…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-02 · 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 store all drugs and biologicals in a locked cart or under direct observation of authorized staff in an area where residents could access it for one (Nurse Cart) of one cart reviewed for medication storage. The facility failed to ensure that LVN B locked the nurse cart before leaving it unattended on 12/02/2025. This failure could place the residents at risk of accessing/opening the cart causing accidental overdose, adverse reactions, or misuse of medications.Findings included: Observation on 12/02/2025 at 10:04 AM, revealed a nurse medication cart was parked outside the nurse's station unlocked. The cart and the drawers were facing the hallway, the drawers contained medications. It was observed that a resident in a wheelchair was sitting approximately ten steps from the open cart. During an observation and interview on 12/02/2025 at 10:06 AM, MA C saw the cart and locked it. She said the cart was used by the nurses, but she was not sure who was currently using it. She said the cart should always be locked…
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 · E2025-06-18 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — patternReasonably 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 the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences for three (Residents #1, #2, and #3) of ten residents reviewed for Reasonable Accommodation of Needs. The facility failed to ensure the call light systems in Residents #1, #2, and #3's rooms were in a position that was accessible to the resident on 06/18/2025. This failure could place the residents at risk of being unable to obtain assistance when needed and help in the event of an emergency. Findings included: Resident #1 Record review of Resident #1's Face Sheet, dated 06/18/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with muscle weakness and lack of coordination. Record review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS (assessment used to determine functional capabilities and health needs) Assessment, dated 05/27/2025, reflected the resident had a severe…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-18 · 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 needed respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning, was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for 1 (Resident #6) of one residents reviewed for Respiratory Care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #6's breathing mask for his nebulizer (a medical device that turns liquid medicine into mist that could be inhaled through a face mask) was properly stored when not in use on 06/18/2025. This failure could place residents at risk for respiratory infection and not having their respiratory needs met. Findings include: Record review of Resident #6's Face Sheet, dated 06/18/2025, reflected an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with asthma (lung disorder caused by narrowing of the airways) and shortness of breath. Record review…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-18 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that drugs and biologicals were stored in locked compartments for two (Resident #4 and Resident #5) of two residents reviewed for Storage of Drugs and Biologicals. The facility failed to ensure that no medications were inside Resident #4 and Resident #5's room. This failure could place the residents at risk of overdose or misuse of medications. Findings included: Resident #4 Record review of Resident #4's Face Sheet, dated 06/18/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with nasal congestion, rashes, and bipolar disorder (a mental health condition that causes extreme mood swings between emotional highs and lows). Record review of Resident #4's Comprehensive MDS Assessment, dated 05/06/2025, reflected the resident was cognitively intact (capable of normal cognition and needs little support) with a BIMS score of 15. The Comprehensive MDS Assessment indicated that the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-06-18 · 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 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 #5) of 1 resident reviewed for Infection Control. The facility failed to ensure CNA D performed hand hygiene and changed her gloves while providing incontinent care to Resident #5 on 06/18/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of infections. Findings included: Record review of Resident #5's Face Sheet, dated 06/18/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with diarrhea (loose bowel movement). Record review of Resident #5's Comprehensive MDS Assessment, dated 05/29/2025, reflected the resident was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 15. The Comprehensive MDS Assessment indicated that 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 · E2025-03-13 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — patternDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights that included measurable objectives and timeframes to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable mental and psychosocial well-being for 3 of 8 residents (Resident #2, #74, and #182) reviewed for Care Plans. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 was care planned for oxygen administration. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #74 was care planned for condom catheter and hospice care. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #182 was care planned to use the call light to alert staff. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving the necessary care and services needed. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #2's Face Sheet, dated 03/11/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with emphysema (a lung disease that damages the air…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-03-13 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needed respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning, was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for 4 of 8 residents (Resident #2, #19, #39, and #67) reviewed for Respiratory Care. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 had an order for oxygen administration on 3/11/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #19's mask for CPAP was stored properly on 3/11/2025. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #39's oxygen tubing was properly stored when not in use on 03/11/2025. 4. The facility failed to ensure Resident #67's CPAP mask, for the CPAP machine was placed in a sanitary bag to avoid contamination while not in use and had active physician orders for use of the CPAP machine. These failures could place residents at risk for respiratory infection and not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-03-13 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distributed, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen, reviewed for food and nutrition services. 1. The facility failed to ensure the ice scoop for the ice machine in the facility kitchen was cleaned and not stored inside the ice machine. 2. The facility failed to cover a large trash can stored in the kitchen area. 3. The facility failed to ensure kitchen cooking equipment was cleaned. 4. The facility failed to place a cover on top of the tea dispenser to avoid air borne contaminants. These failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination and other air-borne illnesses. Findings include: Observations on 03/11/25 from 9:04 AM to 9:17 AM in the facility's only kitchen revealed: The ice machine, located in the kitchen, had the ice scoop stored inside of the machine with the ice and the ice scoop had brownish stains on it. One large trash can, which contained food and trash, in the kitchen area, was uncovered. One…
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 before2025-03-13 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to treat each resident with respect, dignity, and care in a manner and environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for one (Resident #58) of nineteen residents reviewed for Dignity. The facility failed to ensure CNA C pulled the privacy bag all the way down on Resident #58's catheter bag (collects urine from the urinary bladder) so the catheter bag and its content would not be visible during lunchtime on 03/11/2025. This failure could place the residents at risk of not having their right to a dignified existence maintained. Findings included: Record review of Resident #58's Face Sheet, dated 03/11/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with obstructive and reflux uropathy (a blockage in the urinary tract). Record review of Resident #58's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 01/27/2025, reflected the resident had a moderate impairment 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 · D2025-03-13 · 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 interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the timeliness of each resident's person-centered, comprehensive care plan, and to ensure that the comprehensive care plan is reviewed and revised by an interdisciplinary team for one of (Resident #19) eight residents reviewed for Revised Care Plans. The facility failed to complete a quarterly care plan for Resident #19. These failures placed residents at risk of needs not being met. Findings included: Record review of Resident #19's Face Sheet, dated 03/11/2025, reflected an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with obstructive sleep apnea (a sleep disorder where breathing is interrupted repeatedly during sleep). Record review of Resident #19's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 01/30/2025, reflected the resident had a severe impairment in cognition with a BIMS score of 01 (resident required significant assistance and support in daily life). The Quarterly MDS Assessment indicated that the resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-13 · 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 reviews, the facility failed to ensure that residents' environment remained free of accident hazards as was possible for 1of 6 residents (Resident #25) reviewed for accident prevention. The facility failed to ensure resident #25 had physician orders for the bolster pads that were applied to her mattress for fall prevention. This failure could prevent the resident from having an environment that was free and clear of accidents and hazards. Findings include: Record review of Resident #25's Face Sheet, dated 03/11/25, reflected she was an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included unsteadiness on feet, dementia (cognitive decline), and history of falling. Record review of Resident #25's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 02/28/25, reflected she had a BIMS score of 00 (severe cognitive impairment). For ADL care it reflected for transfers, toileting, and bathing and the resident was totally dependent for assistance. Record review…
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 before2025-03-13 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who were incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infection and to restore continence to the extent possible for one of (Resident #74) two residents reviewed for Catheter Care. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #74's external catheter (non-invasive to collect urine from the bladder such as a condom catheter) had an order on 03/11/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of needs for catheter care not met. Findings included: Record review of Resident #74's Face Sheet, dated 03/11/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with unstageable pressure ulcer to the sacrum (unable to determine the depth of the pressure ulcer). Record review of Resident #74's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 01/26/2025, reflected the resident was cognitively intact with a BIMS score of 13 (resident capable of normal cognition…
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 before2025-03-13 · 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
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that one (Probiotics) of one medication reviewed for Medication Storage was stored properly. 1. The facility failed to ensure MA F administered Resident #26's probiotics that was properly stored. 2. The facility failed to ensure LVN E administered Resident #46' probiotics that was properly stored. These failures could place the residents at risk of not receiving the full benefit of the medications or supplement. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #26's Face Sheet, dated 03/12/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with constipation and nausea. Record review of Resident #26's Comprehensive MDS Assessment, dated 02/03/2025, reflected the resident had a moderate impairment in cognition with a BIMS score of 11 (assessment tool that provides insight into the resident's cognition). The Comprehensive MDS Assessment also indicated the resident had medically complex conditions.…
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 before2025-03-13 · 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 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 #34) of eight residents reviewed for Infection Control. The facility failed to ensure CNA B changed his gloves after touching the drainage tubing of Resident #72's Foley catheter (device that drains urine from the urinary bladder) during incontinent care on 03/11/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of infections. Findings included: Record review of Resident #72's Face Sheet, dated 03/11/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with obstructive and reflux uropathy (a blockage in the urinary tract that cause the urine to flow back to the kidney). Record review of Resident #72's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2024-02-15 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — patternProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices for two (Resident #12 and Resident # 135) of three residents reviewed for wounds. 1) Resident #12's skin tear to her right forearm was not monitored after she received it on 02/06/24. 2) LVN E failed to treat Resident# 135's wounds on 02/11/24. This failure could place residents at risk for delays in treatment, developing infections and unidentified deterioration of their wounds. Findings included: 1) Review of Resident #12's MDS quarterly assessment, dated 01/03/24, reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her cognitive status was moderately impaired. Her diagnoses included stroke and Parkinson's disease. Review of Resident #12's Progress Notes dated 02/06/24 at 6:09 PM written by LVN B reflected the: Resident skin is dry and warm 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 · D2024-02-15 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolatedImmediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the 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 interview and record review the facility failed to immediately notify, consistent with his or her authority, the resident representative(s) when there was an accident involving the resident which resulted in injury and had the potential for requiring physician intervention for one (Resident #12) of three residents reviewed for injuries. The facility failed to notify Resident #12's family after the resident was injured and sustained a skin tear to her right forearm that required ster-strips on 02/06/24. This failure could result in family members and resident representative's not receiving notification of resident injuries. Findings included: Review of Resident #12's MDS quarterly assessment, dated 01/03/24, reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her cognitive status was moderately impaired. Her diagnoses included stroke and Parkinson's disease. Review of Resident #12's Progress Note dated 02/06/24 at 6:04PM written by LVN B reflected: Resident skin is dry and warm…
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 · D2024-02-15 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents with pressure ulcers received the necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection, and prevent new ulcers from developing for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #135 and Resident #77) reviewed for pressure injury. 1. LVN E failed to treat Resident #135's and Resident #77's wounds on 02/11/24. 2. The WCN failed to ensure Resident #77's head wound was not exposed to infection and contamination when she laid the resident's head on his pillow after cleaning the wound. These failures could place residents at risk for deterioration of wound. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #77's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 02/03/24 reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His cognitive status was intact. His diagnoses included wound infection, and sacral pressure ulcer. Review of Resident #77's WCP notes, dated 02/07/24, 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-15 · 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 for food safety in the facility's only kitchen. The facility failed to ensure that food items past their expiration date were discarded. This failure could place residents at risk for food borne illness. Findings included: Observation and interview with the Dietician on 02/13/24 at 10:30 a.m. while conducting a tour of the facility refrigerated storage area with Dietician, a 16-ounce container of Beef Bullion paste that had a date reading 11/07/23, no other date was observed on the container. The container was found to have been opened on an unknown date. Dietician explained that the date on the container was the date that the facility had received the Beef Bullion paste and that most pre-packaged containers were expected to be ok for consumption for 90 days after they have been opened. The Dietician immediately discarded the container in front of the investigator. In an interview on 02/15/24 at 2:12 PM with the Dietician she…
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 before2024-02-15 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 (Resident #3) of 8 residents reviewed for infection. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA A performed hand hygiene during incontinence care for Resident #3. This failure could cause residents to suffer from infection. Findings included: 1. Review of Resident #3's Face Sheet dated 02/6/24, reflected she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included dementia. An observation and interview on 02/14/24 at 2:26 PM revealed CNA A was preparing to perform incontinence care for Resident #3. CNA A washed his hands and put on gloves. The resident was in bed lying on her back. CNA A folded down the front of the brief and cleaned the peri-area. The resident was assisted to reposition to her right…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“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
$14,069 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $14,069 — penalty dated 2025-03-10
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 | 3 of 5 | 2.3 | +0.7 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.6 | +0.4 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 3.6 | +0.4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| HOOPER, GRADY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 06/01/2023 |
| DKP INVESTMENTS, LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2023 |
| GO OPERATIONS 6 LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/22/2025 |
| SLM INVESTMENTS LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2023 |
| GOLDEN, LAUREN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2023 |
| GOLDEN, SHAWN | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 06/01/2023 |
| HURST, ROY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2023 |
| PRINCE, DANNY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2023 |
| GO PROPERTIES 6, LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2023 |
| HASSAN, SYED | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 06/01/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 10 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.
4 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in TX
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Texas Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 676448. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-05-21, 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.