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

Rockdale Estates & Rehabilitation

1350 W. Highway 79, Rockdale, TX 76567 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 84 certified beds · (512) 446-2548 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (512) 446-2548 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)1 actual-harm citation$8,018 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
Worth asking about
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • the CMS record shows $8,018 in federal fines (most recent 2024-03-07)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)

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

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

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 4 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 1 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
602 N Main St · (512) 446-4555 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
725 Cameron Ave · (512) 446-2491 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1201 W US Highway 79 · (512) 446-6100 · Call to confirm hours
Park
E 4th Ave @ Martin Luther King Dr · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
204 County Road 308 · (512) 446-3115

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 1 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 1 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 2 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

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

Overall rating3★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased14.7%15.8%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight2.0%3.0%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.3%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection4.7%0.8%2.0%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms11.2%2.4%6.5%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury8.3%3.3%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened13.6%14.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication27.9%18.0%18.9%worse
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine98.6%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.3%3.8%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control18.7%13.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table15.2%9.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication7.9%1.5%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission43.7%25.7%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit20.3%12.3%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days3.202.171.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days3.022.061.80worse

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

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

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

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

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

10.3%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
not reportedno hours filed
Therapy hours / resident / day

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
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.3%CMS range 6.5–15.010.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay3.1%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened0.0%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization9.1%CMS range 5.4–16.47.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.631.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this measure

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

Staffing

0.42
RN hours/ resident / day
0.49
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.81
Aide hours/ resident / day
2.72
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.37
RN hoursweekends
42.6%
Total nursing turnover
20.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 84 beds and averages 71.6 residents a day — about 85% occupied, or roughly 12 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 2.72 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.42 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.81 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.53 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.80 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.44 to 0.37 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 43% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

7
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-04-16)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-03-07)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Actual harm · G2024-03-20 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and to prevent accidents for one resident (Resident #1) of five reviewed for accidents and hazards in that: The facility failed to supervise Resident #1 when she was found walking in the hallway without her walker, resulting in a fall with injuries on 3/13/2024. This failure placed residents at risk of accidents or falls resulting in injuries, pain and hospitalization. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 3/20/24 reflected an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses including: Dementia (progressive or persistent loss of intellectual functioning), difficulty in walking, lack of coordination, heart disease, Hypertension (high blood pressure) and Cognitive Communication deficit. Review of Resident #1's MDS dated [DATE] reflected a BIMS of 5 suggesting severe cognitive impairment. Review of the MDS section GG 0120 - Mobility Devices, indicated Resident #1 used a walker. 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2025-04-16 · tag F0727 — failed to provide required RN coverage — pattern
    Have a registered nurse on duty 8 hours a day; and select a registered nurse to be the director of nurses on a full time basis.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a designated DON was providing coverage on a full time basis for one out of one facility. The facility failed to ensure they had a DON on duty for a total of 12 days from 04/04/2025 to 04/14/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of missing assessments, interventions and care. Findings include: On 04/14/2025 at 10:30 AM an interview with the Executive Director revealed the facility does not have an active Director of Nursing employed at the facility. The ED stated that the facility has ensured a Registered Nurse is onsite at all times. The ED also reported that a Corporate Nurse was on site once a month to help with DON coverage. The ED stated that the facility uses telehealth and is available for support at all times. The ED reported the last time the DON was on site was 04/03/2025. On 04/14/2025 at 2:30 PM record review indicated that the DON was last in the facility providing DON coverage on 04/03/2025. RR indicated that for the week dated 03/30/2025 to 04/05/2025, the DON provided DON coverage for…

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

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-16 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs for 1 (Resident #52) of 5 residents reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #52's comprehensive care plan included her ADL status, incontinence, risk for falls, risk for pressure ulcers, nutritional status, code status, medical diagnoses, and therapies received. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving necessary care and services or having important care needs identified and met. Findings included : Review of Resident #52's face sheet, dated 04/15/25, reflected an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease (dementia that damages the brain), unspecified protein-calorie malnutrition, hypertension (high blood pressure), abnormalities of gait…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-16 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices for 2 (Resident #50 & #171) of 6 residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to document weekly skin assessments for Residents #50 & #171 according to physician orders. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving necessary medical care, and hospitalization. Findings included: Review of Resident #50's undated face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including unspecified dementia (progressive loss of mental abilities like memory, thinking, and reasoning, so severe that it interferes with daily life), unspecified severe protein calorie malnutrition (a condition characterized by a significant deficiency in both protein and energy intake, leading to a range of physical symptoms), muscle…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-16 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 3 medication carts (100/200 nurse cart) reviewed for medication storage. The facility failed to ensure an expired insulin pen was removed from the medication cart. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the intended therapeutic effect of the insulin. Findings included: An observation of the 100/200 nurse cart on 05/15/25 at 2:09 PM revealed an insulin pen with an open date of 03/04/25. During interview on 04/15/25 at 2:11 PM, LVN B stated he was not sure when insulin pens expired after being opened, but he would get the answer. LVN B returned and stated the insulin was good for 28 days so, the pen opened on 03/04/25 should have been removed from the cart. He stated if expired medications were administered, the resident may not have received the desired effect. During an interview on…

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

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-04-16 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure each resident's drug regimen was free from unnecessary drugs for one (Resident #66) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility failed to indicate an adequate diagnosis for Quetiapine (an atypical antipsychotic medication used to treat schizophrenia and bipolar disorder) for Resident #66. This failure could place residents on psychoactive medications, without an adequate diagnosis, at risk for taking unnecessary medications. Findings included: Review of Resident #66's undated face sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease (dementia that damages the brain) - unspecified (primary diagnosis), dementia in other diseases classified elsewhere - severe - without behavioral disturbances - psychotic disturbance - mood disturbance and anxiety, essential hypertension (high blood pressure), difficulty walking, other lack of coordination, 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-16 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for dietary services in that: Dietary staff failed to effectively label items in the refrigerator and freezer. These failures could place residents at risk for food contamination and foodborne illness. The findings include: During the initial tour of the kitchen on 04/14/2025 beginning at 9:11 am the following was observed: The refrigerator contained what appeared to be green bell peppers, tomatoes, and bananas in a clear plastic bin with no label. The freezer contained what appeared to be cheese sticks in a clear plastic bag with no label. Interview with the Dietary Manager on 04/16/2025 at 11:05 am, the DM stated all items in the refrigerators and freezers should be sealed, labeled, and dated. The DM confirmed that the items not labeled were green bell peppers, tomatoes, bananas, and cheese sticks. The DM stated all items have been thrown away due to them not being labeled.…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-16 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for two of four residents (Resident #2 and Resident #52) reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure LVN A wore a gown on 04/15/25 when she provided wound care to Resident #2, who was on EBP. The facility failed to ensure CNA D performed hand hygiene when changing gloves on 04/15/25 when she provided incontinent care for Resident #52. These failures could place residents at risk of cross contamination or infection. Findings included: Review of Resident #2's face sheet, dated 04/15/25, reflected an [AGE] year-old male initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. His diagnoses included other chronic osteomyelitis right ankle and foot (infection of the bone), peripheral…

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

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-03-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for one of one kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation. A. The facility failed to ensure Dietary Manager wore a hair net when standing by clean plates in the kitchen. B. The facility failed to maintain sanitary all 3 ovens and the only fryer in the kitchen. C. The facility failed to ensure the Dietary Manager properly used proper hand sanitation during food preparation. These failures could place residents who were served from the kitchen at risk for health complications, foodborne illness, and decreased quality of life. Findings included: A. Observation on 03/05/21 at 9:05 AM, Dietary Manager exited the dining room and entered the dishwashing room area without wearing a hair net. She stood by clean plates and cups in the dishwashing room. The Dietary Manager continued to walk in the kitchen and stood by the sink where she donned her hair net. Observation on 03/05/2024 at 9:07 AM revealed there were hair nets…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-03-07 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for 3 of 15 residents (Residents #69, #1, and #59) reviewed for ADLs. The facility failed to ensure Residents #69, #1, and #59 were provided nail care, personal hygiene as documented in their plan of care and MDS. This failure could place residents at risk of scratches, infection, and poor self-esteem. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #69's Face Sheet reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of unspecified Dementia (a group of thinking and social symptoms that interfere with daily functioning, impairment of at least two brain functions, such as memory loss and judgment), unspecified severity, with mood disturbance and age-related physical debility (general weakness). Record review of Resident # 69's Quarterly MDS assessment dated…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-03-07 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — isolated
    Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
    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, based on comprehensive assessment and care plan and the preferences of each resident, an ongoing program to support residents in their choices of activities, both facility-sponsored group and individual activities and independent activities, designed to meet the interest of and support the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, encouraging interaction in the community for 3 of 5 residents (Resident #43, Resident #46 and Resident #59) reviewed for quality of life. The facility failed to ensure one-on- one activities for Residents #43, Resident #46 and Resident #59 was provided according to the one-on-one activity schedule. This failure could place residents at risk for a decline in social, mental, psychosocial well-being, and a diminished quality of life. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #43's face sheet, dated 03/06/2024, reflected Resident #43 was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-11-22 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide 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 received care, consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent pressure ulcers for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was turned or repositioned for 12 hours the night of 11/21/23 to the morning of 11/22/23. This failure placed residents at risk of developing avoidable pressure ulcers, pain, and infection. Findings included: Review of the undated face sheet for Resident #1 reflected an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses of multiple sclerosis (a disease that affects central nervous system making it difficult for the brain to send signals to rest of the body), paraplegia (paralysis of the legs and lower body), muscle weakness, need for assistance with personal care, joint contracture (condition in which a joint becomes very stuff and has limited movement), dementia, muscle wasting and atrophy, lack…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2023-01-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection and prevention control program that included, at a minimum, a system for preventing and controlling infections for 4 of 4 residents (Residents #43, #41, #31, and #58) reviewed for incontinence care and usage of wrist blood pressure monitor, as indicated by: a) CNA A while providing incontinent care for Resident # 43, did not sanitize the bedside table used for incontinent care and did not discard the food on that table before leaving the room. CNA A also contaminated the clean wet wipes by pulling out them directly from the whole packet with gloves soiled with feces. b) CNA B did not clean and disinfect the wrist blood pressure monitor while using it on Resident # 41, Resident #31 and Resident # 58. This failure could place the residents at the facility at risk of transmission of disease and infection. Findings included: Review of Resident #43's face sheet, dated 01/05/23, reflected Resident #43 initially admitted 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

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

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

Fines & penalties

$8,018 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $8,018 — penalty dated 2024-03-07

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to FANNIN COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT — 5 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 53.0≈ chain avg
Health inspection 4 of 53.6+0.4 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.2-0.2 vs chain
Quality measures 1 of 52.2-1.2 vs chain
The other 4 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.0★, 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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
FANNIN COUNTY HOSPITAL AUTHORITYOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 09/01/2025
SANDERSON, CLARKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 09/01/2025
JOHNSON 5.0 LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 09/01/2025
JOHNSON, JEFFREYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2025
BAUDER, KELLYIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/10/2025
BAUDER, MADISONIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/10/2025
BAUDER, PARKERIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/10/2025
BAUDER, WILLIAMIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/10/2025
BOULWARE, DOUGLASIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/10/2025
BOULWARE, SANDRAIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/10/2025
BOULWARE, STEVENIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/10/2025
BOULWARE, THOMASIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/10/2025
JOHNSON, MARYIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/10/2025
WALKER, KATIEIndividualINDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNFsince 09/10/2025
BAUDER FAMILY INVESTMENTS, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2025
BOULWARE ST JAMES LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2025
PMG REALCO-MABANK, LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2025
STEVEN BOULWARE FAMILY INVESTMENTS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2025
HOUSE, JANELLEIndividualADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 20 rows in the source record cover these 19 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$7.1M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-0.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 7%Medicare 23%Other / private 70%

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

$266per resident / day
operating cost
$8,085per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$266per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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

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

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

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 676093. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-16, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

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

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

What to do next