Rowlett Health And Rehabilitation Center
9300 Lakeview Pkwy, Rowlett, TX 75088 · For profit - Limited Liability company · 163 certified beds · (972) 475-4700 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high number of inspection citations overall (16) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 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 | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 5 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 held steady at 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.
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 | 39.9% | 15.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 2.2% | 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 | 0.5% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.3% | 2.4% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 5.7% | 3.3% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 31.6% | 14.0% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 20.1% | 18.0% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 98.4% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.7% | 3.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 18.2% | 13.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 5.1% | 9.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.3% | 88.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 26.0% | 25.7% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 5.0% | 12.3% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.30 | 2.17 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.69 | 2.06 | 1.80 | typical |
‡ 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.
50.3% 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 61 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 53.9% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 52 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.95 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 96% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| 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 | 50.3%CMS range 42.7–61.3 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.6%CMS range 6.1–14.4 | 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 | 53.9% | 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 | 55.8% | 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 | 42.3% | 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 | not 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 discharge | 100.0% | 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 | 1.2% | 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 | 2.5% | 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 | 7.4%CMS range 3.9–13.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.16 | 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 163 beds and averages 124.0 residents a day — about 76% occupied, or roughly 39 beds typically open. It usually has some room. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.17 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.24 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.05 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 2.89 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.28 on weekdays — 12% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.21 to 0.30 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 54% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
16 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 6 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-24 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely for 10 of 15 resident rooms on the 500 hall (Resident rooms #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9 and #10), and residents eating in the dining room, reviewed for environment.Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely for 10 of 15 resident rooms on the 500 hall (Resident rooms #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9 and #10), and residents eating in the dining room, reviewed for environment. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident rooms #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9 and #10, were thoroughly cleaned and sanitized. 2. The facility failed to ensure the serving table in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-24 · 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, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen, reviewed for food and nutrition services. Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen, reviewed for food and nutrition services. 1. The facility failed to place a cover on top of the tea dispenser to avoid air borne contaminants. 2. The facility failed to ensure food in the freezer and dry storage area was labeled and dated when stored. 3. The facility failed to ensure expired food in the refrigerator and dry storage area was discarded. 4. The facility failed to ensure the ice machine and ice scoop holder were thoroughly cleaned. These failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination and food-borne illnesses. Findings include: Observations on 07/22/25 from 9:07 AM to 9:20 AM in the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-24 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on 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 two (Resident #76 and Resident #79) of twenty-four residents reviewed for reasonable accommodation of needs. The facility failed to ensure the call light system in Resident #76's room was in a position that was accessible to the resident on 07/22/2025.The facility failed to ensure the call light system in Resident #79's room was in a position that was accessible to the resident on 07/22/2025.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 #76 Record review of Resident #76's Face Sheet, dated 07/23/2025, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #76 had diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease (loss of memory and cognitive ability that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-24 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents, who needed respiratory care, were provided such care consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for two (Resident #1 and Resident #63) of six residents reviewed for respiratory care.The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's yankauer suction tip (device used to suction fluids and secretions from the oral cavity) was stored in a bag when not in use on 07/22/2025. The facility failed to ensure Resident 63's oxygen tubing was properly stored in a bag when not in use on 07/22/2025.This failure could place the residents at risk for respiratory infection and not having their respiratory needs met. Findings included: Resident #1Review of Resident #1's Face Sheet, dated 07/24/2025, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old male who originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included cerebral…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an Infection Prevention and Control Program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for one (Resident #78) of six residents observed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure that CNA E changed gloves and performed hand hygiene, did not carry gloves in her pocket, and did not blow on her hands to dry the hand sanitizer, while providing incontinent care to Resident #78 on 07/22/2025.These failures could place the residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of infections.Findings included:Resident #78Review of Resident #78's Face Sheet, dated 07/23/2025, reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who originally admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #78 had diagnoses which included dementia (decline in cognitive function) and the need for assistance with personal care Record…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-06-20 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, 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 the facility's only kitchen, reviewed for food storage, labeling, dating, and kitchen sanitation. The facility failed to ensure food in the facility's refrigerator, was labeled and dated according to guidelines. The facility failed to ensure food in the facility's freezer, was labeled and dated according to guidelines. The facility failed to ensure the ice machine scoop holder, located in the facility's kitchen, was cleaned. The facility failed to ensure kitchen equipment (storage bins) was cleaned and sanitary. These failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination and other air-borne illnesses. Findings included: Observations on 06/18/24 from 09:05 AM to 09:25 AM in the facility's only kitchen reflected: Observation of the ice machine, in the facility kitchen revealed the ice scoop was stored 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 · Ecited before2024-06-20 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely for areas in the facility for 6 (Resident room [ROOM NUMBER], #513, #515, #517, #519, and #522) of 14 resident rooms observed for a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment. The facility failed to ensure that Residents room [ROOM NUMBER], #513, #515, #517, #519, and #522 were cleaned and sanitized. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of living in an unclean and unsanitary environment which could lead to a decreased quality of life. Findings included: An observation on 06/18/24 at 10:50 AM of Resident room [ROOM NUMBER]'s reflected the air conditioning located in the room had dirt particles and black dirt grime on the top and between the vents of the units. The air filters had a thick layer of dust on them. One of the two lights in the resident bathroom was out. The…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-20 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolatedReasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on 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 one (Resident #78) of eight residents reviewed for reasonable accommodation of needs. The facility failed to ensure the call light system in Resident #78's rooms were in a position that was accessible to the residents. 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: Review of Resident #78's Face Sheet, dated 06/19/2024, reflected that resident was an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included difficulty walking, unsteadiness of feet, and weakness. Review of Resident #78's Quarterly MDS Assessment, dated 04/19/2024, reflected Resident #78 had a moderate impairment in cognition with a BIMS score of 11. Resident #15 required moderate assistance for upper body dressing and lower…
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 · D2024-06-20 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that a resident received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents ' choices for 1 (Resident #46) of 1 resident reviewed. for quality of care. The facility failed to to obtain physician orders and assess Resident #46 for a scoop mattress and obtain physician orders prior to installing the scoop mattress. This failure could prevent the resident to be free from of any physical or chemical restraints. Findings included: Record review of Resident #46's Face Sheet, dated 06/19/2024, revealed she was an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included unspecified dementia (memory decline), lack of coordination, and repeated falls. Record review of Resident #46's Quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed, she had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 06 (severe cognitive impairment) and for ADL…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-20 · 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 observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that Residents, 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 2 (Resident #321 and Resident #322) of ten residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #321's nebulizer masks and nasal cannula was properly stored. The facility failed to ensure Resident #322's nasal cannula was properly stored. The facility failed to ensure a Physician's Order was in place for Resident #322's oxygen administration. These failures could place the residents at risk for respiratory infection and not having their respiratory needs met. Findings included: Resident #321 Review of Resident #321's Face Sheet, dated 06/19/2024, reflected that resident was a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a chronic…
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 6 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-06-20 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an Infection Prevention and Control Program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for two (Resident #49 and Resident #89) of eight residents observed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure that CNA D changed his gloves and perform hand hygiene while providing incontinent care to Resident #49 and Resident #89. This failure could place the residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of infection. Findings included: Resident #49 Review of Resident #49's Face Sheet, dated 06/19/2024, reflected resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body) and weakness. Review of Resident #49's Comprehensive MDS Assessment, dated 04/13/2024, reflected Resident #49 had a severe impairment in cognition with a BIMS score of 00.…
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 before2023-08-21 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that were complete and accurately documented for one (Residents #1) of six residents reviewed for clinical records. RN A and LVN B failed to document on Resident #1's August 2023 Medication Administration Record accurate medication times of her insulin on the following dates: 08/01/23, 08/02/3, 08/05/23, 08/06/23,08/07/23, 08/08/23,08/10/23, 08/11/23, 08/12/23,08/13/23, 08/14/23, and 08/15/23. This failure could place residents at risk for inaccurately documented medical records. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's Face Sheet, dated 08/21/23, revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses cognitive communication deficit and type 1 diabetes. Review of Resident #1's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 07/21/23, reflected Resident #1 had a BIMs score of 15 indicating she was cognitively intact. She had…
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 before2023-08-21 · 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
Based on observations, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program that must include, at a minimum, written standards, policies, and procedures for the program which included standard and transmission-based precautions to be followed to prevent spread of infections for one (LVN C) of seven staff reviewed for infection control. LVN C failed to perform hand hygiene between glove changes as he checked blood sugars and provided insulin for Resident #1. This failure could affect residents by placing them at risk for the spread of infection. Findings included: An observation on 08/18/23 at 11:22 AM of LVN C performing a blood sugar check and insulin medication administration for Resident #1 revealed LVN C washed his hands with soap and water and donned gloves after he entered the resident's room. LVN C used an alcohol pad to cleanse the finger of Resident #1 and allowed it to dry. LVN C using a single use needle pricked the finger to Resident #1's right hand and applied a drop of blood to the glucometer test strip and noted a…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-10 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assure that medications were secure and inaccessible to unauthorized staff and residents for 1 (medication aide cart) of 4 medication carts reviewed for medication storage. The facility failed to ensure the medications were placed inside of the medication cart when MA H left the medication cart on the hallway. This failure could place residents at risk of ingesting unprescribed medications resulting in adverse health consequences. Findings included: Observation on 05/08/23 at 09:20 AM during the medication administration revealed MA H leaving the resident's medication on top of the medication cart and stated she was going to get a blood pressure machine. When MA H returned, she proceeded to the resident's room. The medications were still on top of the medication cart. There were staff members on the hallway going in an out of the residents rooms. In an interview on 05/08/23 at 09:48 AM with MA H she stated she forgot the medications on top of the cart when she left to get the blood pressure machine. MA H…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-05-10 · tag F0810 — isolatedProvide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance.
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 special eating equipment and utensils were provided for residents who need them and appropriate assistance to ensure that the resident can use the assistive devices when consuming meals and snacks for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #69) reviewed for feeding assistance. The facility failed to provide Resident #69 an adaptive aid to assist her to eat independently. The failure could place residents who required adaptive feeding equipment at risk for loss of self-worth and empowerment for independent eating, which could lead to unplanned weight loss. Findings: Record review of Resident #69s quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected Resident #69 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses unspecified severe protein-calorie malnutrition (Malnutrition is an imbalance between the nutrients your body needs to function and the nutrients it gets) Rheumatoid arthritis (A chronic inflammatory disease that…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-05-10 · 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, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident that are complete, accurately documented and readily accessible for one (Resident #85) of five residents reviewed for clinical records. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #85's physician's orders for tramadol were written to be given orally and not enterally. This failure could place residents at risk of inaccurate medical records that could affect monitoring and medical services provided. Findings included: Review of Resident #85's face sheet, dated 05/10/23, revealed she was an [AGE] year-old female who admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included cognitive communication deficit, unspecified dementia, and schizoaffective disorder. Review of Resident #85's physician's orders reflected: Tramadol tablet 50 MG, give 50 MG enterally every 6 hours as needed for for lower back pain [sic] with a start date of 09/11/20. Review of Resident #85's most recent quarterly MDS assessment,…
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
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to THE ENSIGN GROUP — 342 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 | 3.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 2.7 | -1.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 4 of 5 | 4.4 | -0.4 vs chain |
The other 341 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 341; lowest-rated first.
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 | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EASTLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL DISTRICT | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 100% | since 12/01/2023 |
| HOWARD, SCOTT | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/15/2025 |
| MOSTAFA ELSAWY, BASSEM | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 02/01/2025 |
| BURNAM, SOON | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 12/01/2023 |
| KEETCH, CHAD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 01/31/2025 |
| TAYLOR, STEPHEN | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | — | since 07/01/2025 |
| FORNEY LAKE HEALTHCARE, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 04/26/2025 |
| ENSIGN SERVICES INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 12/01/2019 |
| LAKE MORRIS HEALTH HOLDINGS LLC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/31/2025 |
| STANDARD BEARER HEALTHCARE OP, LP | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/31/2025 |
| THE ENSIGN GROUP INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | — | since 01/31/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 16 rows in the source record cover these 11 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.
About 71% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. This home reported $1.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 10% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.
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 455904. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-24, 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.