Regency House

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

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.

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.

43.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 134 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 69.8% 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 53 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: not reported. This home filed no therapist hours at all in its payroll data for this quarter. That is a gap in what it reported, and we do not read it as an absence of therapy — the homes that file nothing here include ones that discharged hundreds of Medicare rehab patients in the very same period, who plainly received therapy from someone. Because we cannot tell a home that under-reports from one that genuinely provides little, this home is left out of the comparison above rather than scored at zero. Ask it directly how many therapist hours a rehab resident gets, and on which days.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 120 beds and averages 77.6 residents a day — about 65% occupied, or roughly 42 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.27 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.48 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.11 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 2.91 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.41 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.52 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 54% is about the same as the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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.

19 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 9 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · E2026-01-28 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — pattern
  Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who required dialysis received such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for 2 of 2 residents (Residents #1 and #3) reviewed for dialysis services. The facility failed to ensure the dialysis communication forms were completed to include the pre and post dialysis assessment for Resident #1 and Resident #3. The facility failed to ensure residents had a physician order for dialysis treatment and to inspect vascular access sites for Resident #1 and Resident #3. The facility failed to develop a person-centered care plan for Resident #1 and Resident #3 to address their dialysis needs. These failures could place residents at risk for complications and not receiving proper care and treatment to meet their needs.The findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet revealed Resident #1 was an [AGE] year-old male 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-12-18 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
  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 observations, interviews and record reviews the facility failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident consistent with the resident rights that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment which were to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 3 of 20 residents (Resident #5, Resident #41, Resident #76) reviewed for care plans.The facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for Resident #5's diagnosis of bilateral presbycusis (hearing loss, in both ears, related to damage of the inner ear that develops gradually as you get older).The facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for Resident #41's scalp cancer.The facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for Resident #76's range of motion…

  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 · E2025-12-18 · tag F0914 — pattern
  Provide bedrooms that don't allow residents to see each other when privacy is needed.
  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 ensure each room was designed or equipped to assure full visual privacy for 46 (Rooms 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 23, 25, 26, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 58, 59 and 60) of 60 dual occupancy rooms reviewed for privacy in the facility. The facility failed to ensure that dual occupancy rooms were provided with ceiling suspended curtains, which extended around the bed, to provide total visual privacy. This failure could lead to a lack of privacy for residents, allow residents' private medical treatment to be observed by roommates or others, and lead to a decline in psychosocial well-being. Findings included: During an observation on 12/18/2025 at 11:05 AM of resident rooms 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 14 and 15 on A hall revealed that each room had dual occupancy with an A and B bed in each. During an observation on 12/18/2025 at 11:34 AM of resident rooms 16, 17, 20, 21, 23, 25, 26, 28 and 30 on B hall revealed 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.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-18 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to consult with the resident's physician when there was a need to alter treatment for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for physician notification. (Residents #76) 1. The facility failed to notify the physician of Resident #76's family's demand to use a head strap for her wheelchair. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving appropriate medical treatments, which could result in a decline in health. Findings included:Review of Resident #76's admission Record, dated 12/17/25, revealed she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including quadriplegia (paralysis affecting the body from the neck down) and history of traumatic brain injury. Review of Resident #76's admission MDS Assessment, dated 11/23/25, revealed:She was sometimes able to make herself understood. She had a BIMS score of 11, indicating she was moderately cognitively impaired. She used a wheelchair and a mechanical lift (device used…

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

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-12-18 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolated
  Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the use of the least restrictive alternative for the least amount of time and document ongoing re-evaluation of the need for restraints for 1 of 3 (Resident #76) residents reviewed for restraints. The facility failed to provide assessment, care planning, and a physician's order for the use of a head strap (Velcro strap permanently affixed to the head rest of the wheelchair) restraint for Resident #76. This failure could result in residents having physical restraints used that limited their movement without being evaluated for medical need. Findings included: Review of Resident #76's admission Record, dated 12/17/25, revealed she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including quadriplegia (paralysis affecting the body from the neck down) and history of traumatic brain injury. Review of Resident #76's admission MDS Assessment, dated 11/23/25, revealed:She was sometimes able to make herself…

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

  Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-18 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
  Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure residents who were incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #30) reviewed for catheter care. Resident #30's urine collection bag was observed hanging on the armrest of his wheelchair and above the bladder. This failure could place residents at risk for catheter associated urinary tract infections. The findings included: Record review of Resident #30's admission record dated 12/17/2025 revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis of benign prostatic hyperplasia (an enlarged prostate that can cause urinary problems). He was [AGE] years of age. Record review of Resident #30's MDS dated [DATE] revealed: BIMS - 11 indicating he was moderately impaired. Bladder and bowel appliances = indwelling catheter. Record review of the current care plan for Resident #30, last reviewed/revised: 10/01/2025, revealed in part: 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.

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-09-19 · 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 and prepare food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed, in that: The facility failed to ensure the Food Supervisor (FS) was wear a mustache guard while there was uncovered food in the kitchen. This deficient practice could place residents who consumed meals and/or snacks from the kitchen at risk for food borne illness. The findings were: During an observation and interview on 09/17/24 at 09:32 AM, the FS was noted to have a mustache and not covered with a hair restraint. The FS was leaning over some uncovered pots that contained food and were on the stove top. The FS was asked about his mustache and if he ever covered it,. The FS asked the surveyor if he was supposed to cover it. The FS said that honestly, he had not thought about covering his mustache and at that time, he took a face mask and put it on. During an interview on 09/19/24 at 02:38 PM, the Administrator was made aware of the observation of the FS not having his mustache covered with 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.

  Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · F2024-09-19 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — widespread
  Keep all essential equipment working safely.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation and interview the facility failed to maintain all mechanical, electrical, and patient care equipment in safe operating condition for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for physical environment. The facility failed to ensure one of six stove top burners ignited automatically. This failure could place residents at risk of foodborne illnesses and potential for injury to residents and staff. Findings included: During an observation and interview on 09/17/24 at 09:30 AM, the stove in the kitchen was inspected. One of the six burners was noted to turn not turn on when the knob was turned to on by [NAME] D. [NAME] D said she had to use a lighter to turn that burner on as it did not turn on automatically like the other five burners. [NAME] D said she believed the burner had been like that for about two weeks at that time. During an interview on 09/17/24 at 09:32 AM, the FS said the burner on the stove top did not turn on automatically, but that it would turn on with the use of a lighter. During an observation and interview on 09/18/24 10:08 AM, [NAME] D was asked to show 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.

  Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-09-19 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
  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 time frames to meet, attain, and/or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 2 of 8 residents (Resident #65, Resident #17) reviewed for care plans. 1. The facility failed to have a care plan addressing Resident #17's Enhanced Barrier Protection with her Pressure Ulcer. 2. The facility failed to have a care plan in place to accurately address Resident #65's behavioral problems. This failure could affect residents by placing them at risk of not receiving individualized care and services to meet their needs. The findings included: Resident #17 Record review of Resident #17's admission record dated 09/19/2024 indicated she was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included dementia, and muscle wasting and atrophy. She was [AGE] years of age. Record review of Resident #17's…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2024-09-19 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
  Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all controlled drugs and biologicals were stored in separately locked and permanently affixed compartments for 2 of 8 medication carts (Med Cart #1, Med Cart #2), reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure Med Cart #1, Med Cart #2 remain locked while unattended. This failure could place residents at risk of and unauthorized access to medications. Findings included: Observation of the facility Med Cart #1 on 09/17/2024 at 09:06 am showed the cart to be unlocked and unattended. Observation of the facility Med Cart #2 on 09/17/2024 at 09:08 am showed the cart to be unlocked and unattended. An interview with CMA C on 09/17/2024 at 11:44 am revealed he had walked away from the cart to administer medication to a resident. CMA C stated that the policy was to lock the cart if they are not getting medication out of it and especially if one walks away. CMA C stated he messed up leaving it unlocked and was just in a hurry. An interview with the DON on 09/19/2023 at 2:30 pm revealed medication…

  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

“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.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to CARADAY HEALTHCARE — 8 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 →

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

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 13 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

3 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.

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