Lakeside Nursing And Rehabilitation Center
8707 Lakeside Parkway, San Antonio, TX 78245 · Government - Hospital district · 118 certified beds · (210) 510-3200 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
- it has abuse, neglect, or exploitation citations (F0600, F0607, F0609) — most recent Feb 2024
- it has a citation for mishandling residents’ money or property (F0565)
- inspectors recorded 3 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (23) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- the CMS record shows $14,611 in federal fines (most recent 2024-02-16)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 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 improved from 2 to 5 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 | 8.7% | 15.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.5% | 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 | 0.0% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.4% | 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 | 1.6% | 3.3% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 5.8% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 19.0% | 18.0% | 18.9% | typical |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 1.2% | 3.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 14.0% | 13.4% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 4.7% | 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 | 99.2% | 88.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 21.9% | 25.7% | 22.6% | typical |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 1.6% | 12.3% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 1.77 | 2.17 | 1.67 | typical |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.26 | 2.06 | 1.80 | better |
‡ 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.
44.5% 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 42 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 70.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 70 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 0.74 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 93% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 8% 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 | 44.5%CMS range 33.4–56.6 | 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 | 10.8%CMS range 7.8–15.7 | 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 | 70.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 62.9% | 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 | 57.1% | 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 | 94.6% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 93.3% | 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 | 0.9% | 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 | 0.0% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 6.5%CMS range 3.5–12.1 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.03 | 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 118 beds and averages 112.3 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 6 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 3.33 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.49 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.02 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 2.69 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.59 on weekdays — 25% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.49 to 0.49 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 37% 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.
23 citations, most serious first. The 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 10 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · K2024-02-16 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — patternProtect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident's right to be free from abuse for 3 of 5 residents (Resident #1, #2 and #3) reviewed for abuse: CNA A, as part of a CNA chat group, took a video recording of Resident #1, naked, in the shower having a bowel movement, with a close-up view of her exposed bottom with feces on it and he shared it with the chat group. CNA B, as part of a CNA chat group, took a digital picture of Resident #2, naked, in the shower with her back toward the camera and not aware of the photo and she shared it with the chat group. CNA C as part of a CNA chat group, took a photo of Resident #3 after he had fallen on the floor without pants on, and shared it with the chat group. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The IJ began on February 5th and ended on February 6th 2024. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This deficient practice could affect residents who require assistance with ADL's and result in emotional abuse 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · K2024-02-16 · tag F0607 — failed to have anti-abuse policies — patternDevelop and implement policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews, The facility failed to develop and implement written policies and procedures to prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of residents property for 3 residents (Residents #1, #2 and #3) out of 5 residents reviewed for abuse and neglect in that: CNA A, as part of a CNA chat group, took a video recording of Resident #1, naked, in the shower having a bowel movement, with a close-up view of her exposed bottom with feces on it and he shared it with the chat group. CNA B, as part of a CNA chat group, took a digital picture of Resident #2, naked, in the shower with her back toward the camera and not aware of the photo and she shared it with the chat group. CNA C as part of a CNA chat group, took a photo of Resident #3 after he had fallen on the floor without pants on, and shared it with the chat group. CNA D as part of a CNA chat group, failed to report the video of Resident #1. CNA E as part of the CNA chat group, failed to report 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.
- Immediate jeopardy · K2024-02-16 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — patternTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to report abuse immediately but no later than 2 hours after the incident for 3 of 3 residents (Residents #1, #2, and #3) reviewed for reporting abuse and neglect in that: CNA H was informed about the abuse of Residents #1, #2 and #3 by CNA F of text chat group and did not report it to the Administrator until February 5th at 06:00 a.m. (8 hours later). CNA F, as part of the CNA chat group, failed to report the phone of Resident #2. CNA D, as part of the CNA chat group, failed to report the video of Resident #1. CNA E, as part of the CNA chat group, failed to report the photos of Resident #2 and Resident #3. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The IJ began on February 5th and ended on February 6th 2024. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place the residents at further risk of abuse and neglect due to lack of reporting of incidents. The findings included : 1. Record review of Resident #1's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-05 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 observation, interview and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and time frames to meet a resident's medical and nursing needs to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 4 residents (Residents #2) reviewed for comprehensive care plans in that: The facility failed to care plan Resident #2's abductor wedge that was needed for her after hospitalization care. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving care interventions.The findings included A record review of Resident #2's admission record dated 6/3/2026 revealed an admission date of 8/16/2022 and readmission on [DATE] with diagnoses which included generalized muscle weakness. A record review of Resident #2's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #2 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted for LTC with ADL. Resident #2 was assessed with a BIMS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-05 · 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 interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, complete, accurately documented, readily accessible, and systemically organized medical records for each Resident, for 1 of 4 residents (Resident # 2) reviewed for accurate records. The facility failed to obtain an order Resident #2's physician for the use of the abductor wedge. This failure could place residents at risk for receiving care interventions without physicians' orders. The findings included: A record review of Resident #2's admission record dated 6/3/2026 revealed an admission date of 8/16/2022 and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included generalized muscle weakness. A record review of Resident #2's quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed that resident #2 was a [AGE] year-old female admitted for LTC with ADL. Resident #2 was assessed with a BIMS score of 03 out of a possible 15 which indicated severe cognitive impairment. A record review of Resident…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-07-31 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation. 1. 1 container of an orange juice cup was sitting on top of a box of orange juice and was partially opened. 2. A box of graham cracker tart shells was open and the individual shells were not covered. 3. A box of vanilla ice cream cups was open, not dated and contained cups that had opened and spilled out into the cardboard box. 4. A box of strawberries in the freezer was open and the plastic wrap around the strawberries was torn, exposing the strawberries to the air. 5. An individually wrapped glazed donut was in a plastic baggie with smeared marks at the top where the Date and Contents line was located. 6. An undated and unlabeled bag of red juice was located under the juice dispenser and was not connected to the dispenser. 7. The facility failed to store a mop in the proper position in the utility closet. These deficient practices could place…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents have a right to personal privacy for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #89) reviewed for privacy, in that: The facility failed on 7/30/2025 when CNA A and RA B did not completely close Resident #89's privacy curtain while providing incontinent care. This deficient practice could place residents at-risk of loss of dignity due to lack of privacy. The findings include: Record review of Resident #89's face sheet, dated 07/30/2025, revealed an admission date of 12/09/2023 and, a readmission date of 10/03/2024, with diagnoses which included: Dementia (decline in cognitive abilities), Type 2 diabetes mellitus (high level of sugar in the blood), Hyperlipidemia (Elevated level of any or all lipids(fat) in the blood),Dysphagia (Difficulty swallowing), Schizoaffective disorder (mental disorder characterized by abnormal thought processes and an unstable mood). Record review of Resident #89's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 04/25/2025, revealed the resident had a BIMS score of 09, indicating she was moderately…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-07-31 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
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 the resident Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 2 (Resident #48 and Resident #84) of 5 residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. 1.The facility failed to ensure Resident #48 was coded on his annual MDS assessment dated [DATE] as receiving an antipsychotic medication. 2.The facility failed to ensure Resident #84 was coded on his quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] as receiving an antipsychotic medication. This failure could place residents at risk for improper or incorrect care and services necessary for their physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. The findings included: 1.Review of Resident #48's admission sheet with an original admission date of 8/31/24 and a re-admission date of 7/16/25, showed a [AGE] year-old male resident with diagnoses including Dementia, Depression, Anxiety, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Cholecystitis (inflammation of the gallbladder, often caused by…
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 before2025-07-31 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interviews, and record reviews, 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 disease and infection for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #86) reviewed for infection control, in that: While providing colostomy care for Resident #86, LVN C failed to use proper infection control. These deficient practices could place residents at-risk for infection due to improper care practices. The findings included: Record review of Resident #86's face sheet, dated 07/30/2025, revealed an admission date of 02/05/2025, and a readmission date of 05/01/2025, with diagnoses which included: Dementia (decline in cognitive abilities), Type 2 diabetes mellitus(high level of sugar in the blood),Dysphagia (Difficulty swallowing), Depression (mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness and loss of interest), Hypothyroidism (under active thyroid),…
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 · D2024-06-21 · 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, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences except when to do so would endanger the health or safety of the residents for 1 of 3 residents (Resident # 15) reviewed for call light. The facility failed to ensure. Resident # 15's call light was within reach. This failure could place residents at risk of achieving independent functioning, dignity, and wellbeing. Findings include: Record review of Resident 15's face sheet dated 6/18/24, reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident # 15 had diagoses which included: Guillain-Barré syndrome, (is a rare neurological disorder that occurs when the body's immune system attacks the peripheral nervous system), Paraplegia (is a specific pattern in which you can't deliberately control or move your muscles) and Pulmonary hypertension (condition that occurs when blood…
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 · D2024-06-21 · tag F0559 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to share a room with spouse or roommate of choice and receive written notice before a change is made.
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 record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the right to receive written notice of a room change before the change was made for 2 of 2 resident (Resident #41 & Resident #80) reviewed for resident room changes. The facility did not provide evidence that Resident #41 and Resident #80 was given a written notice of a room change before the resident was moved. This deficient practice could affect residents in the facility that are moved without required notification. The findings included: Record review of Resident #41's comprehensive MDS assessment, dated 06/14/2024 reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] a primary diagnosis of Other encephalopathy (damage or disease that affects the brain) and assessed to have severe cognitive impairment. Record review of Resident #41's face sheet, dated 06/21/2024 listed Resident #41's RP as Resident #41's primary contact. Record review of Resident #80's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 06/03/2024, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-21 · tag F0565 — failed to support the resident council — isolatedHonor the resident's right to organize and participate in resident/family groups in the facility.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to demonstrate their response and rationale regarding the resident's council's grievances after group meetings concerning issues of resident care and life in the facility and provide a private space for residents' monthly council meetings for 1 of 1 resident council, in that: The facility failed to demonstrate their response and rationale for such response to the resident council's grievances. The facility failed to provide the resident council with a private space for their monthly meetings. This failure could place residents that participate in a resident council at risk of not having the right to their concerns and grievances followed through with. The findings included: During confidential interviews on 06/19/24 at 02:02 PM, residents stated grievances were not always followed up on and they were concerned the grievances they wrote were not being addressed. They stated they felt they could not make grievances without being reprimanded by staff. They expressed they were not aware they could have resident council meetings…
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 · D2024-06-21 · tag F0655 — isolatedCreate and put into place a plan for meeting the resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of being admitted
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan for each resident that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that meet professional standards of quality for 1 (Residents #451) of 8 residents reviewed for baseline care plans. Resident #451's baseline care plan, dated 06/18/24, did not reflect any interventions for focus of at risk for falls. This deficient practice could affect residents admitted to the facility and result in missed or inadequate care. The findings included: Record Review of Resident #451's admission Record, dated 06/18/24, reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted [DATE] with diagnoses to include fracture of left femur, difficulty in walking, abnormalities of gait and mobility, cognitive communication deficit, and need for assistance with personal care. Record Review of Resident #451's admission MDS assessment, dated 06/12/24, reflected a BIMS score of 13 out of 15, indicating cognitively intact.…
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 10 citations
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-21 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #28) reviewed for pharmacy services. Resident #28 was provided a medication, Prilosec, outside of the ordered time range. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the therapeutic effects of their prescribed medications. The findings included: Record review of Resident #28's face sheet, dated 6/20/24, reflected a [AGE] year-old female with an initial admission date of 10/28/19 and diagnoses including: Acute Pancreatitis ( condition where the pancreas becomes inflamed (swollen) over a short period of time, Cirrhosis of the Liver ( a type of liver damage where healthy cells are replaced by scar tissue) and Hepatic Failure ( loss of liver function ). Record review of Resident # 28's Quarterly MDS…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-21 · 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 ensure drugs and biologicals were stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for, 1 of 4 medication carts observed, in that: The Nurse Medication Cart in the 300 hall contained eleven loose medication pills. This failure could place residents who receive medications at risk for not receiving the intended therapeutic effects of medications. The findings were: Observation on 06/19/2024 at 9:57 a.m. of the 300 Hall Nurse Medication Cart revealed there were eleven loose medication pills inside one of the drawers. During an interview with Nurse E on 06/19/2024 at 9:57 a.m., Nurse E confirmed there were eleven loose medication pills inside a drawer of the Nurse Medication Cart. During an interview with the DON on 06/19/2024 @ 10:27 a.m., she stated medication carts should not have loose medications. They were the responsibility of the nurse that accepted responsibility for the cart, also the medications carts were supposed to be checked bi-weekly by the ADON's and any loose medications…
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 · D2024-06-21 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — isolatedEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to prepare puree food by methods that conserve nutritive value, flavor, and appearance for 1 of 1 kitchen observed for puree preparation. The facility failed to follow the puree diet recipe for Pureed Buttered [NAME] Bread for 06/20/24 lunch. This failure could affect residents on puree diet at risk of receiving inadequate diet that could affect their health. Findings included: Record Review of Week At a Glance week 2 revealed Pureed Buttered [NAME] Bread to be served for pureed diets. Record Review of recipe Pureed Buttered [NAME] Bread, Copyright 2024, reflected Ingredients: white sliced bread, melted margarine, and milk and instructions to add an appropriate amount of liquid (NOT WATER) to achieve a smooth, pudding or soft mashed potato consistency. During an observation, interview, and record review on 06/20/24 at 10:11 AM, [NAME] F prepared Pureed Buttered [NAME] Bread not according to the recipe. The recipe was not present while [NAME] F was preparing this recipe. Observation revealed [NAME] F did not…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-06-21 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolatedMake sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
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 a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, staff, and the public for 1 of 32 residents (Resident #50) reviewed for safe comfortable environment. The facility failed to ensure Resident #50's room was free of two cracks in the floor, running the length of the room. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of falling due to a tripping hazard created from the floor crack. The findings included: Observation and interview on 06/18/2024 at 12:13 PM, Resident #50's room was revealed to contain two cracks, each measuring approximately 1.5 millimeters in width or slightly larger than the thickness of pencil lead and measuring approximately 12 feet long of one crack and the other measuring approximately 8 feet long. Resident #50 stated she has had this crack in her room for as long as she had been in the room and did not prefer to have the crack in the floor. Resident #50 stated she has expressed 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 · D2024-06-21 · tag F0925 — failed to control pests — isolatedMake sure there is a pest control program to prevent/deal with mice, insects, or other pests.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program for 1 of 1 dining room for pests, in that: An unknown number of gnats were surrounding the beverage station (to include cranberry juice, water, coffee, mugs, and glasses) in the dining room for 06/18/24 lunch. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of residing in an environment with pests. Findings included: Observation on 06/18/24 at 11:59 AM revealed an unknown number of flying black living things, surrounding mugs and glasses that were upside down and present in the beverage station. It was further revealed the residents were getting their beverages from this station for 06/18/24 lunch. Observation and interview 06/18/24 12:09 PM with the Activities Director revealed there were bugs around the beverage station. She stated she would get the maintenance director or the dietary department to clean the beverage area. Observation on 06/18/24 at 12:16 PM revealed 8 residents received mugs or glasses from the beverage station that had these black flying…
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 · D2023-09-13 · tag F0551 — isolatedGive the resident's representative the ability to exercise the resident's rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to obtain documentation that the resident's representative has been delegated the necessary authority to exercise the resident's rights and must verify that a court-appointed representative has the necessary authority for the decision-making at issue as determined by the court. For example, a court-appointed representative might have the power to make financial decisions, but not health care decisions. Additionally, the facility must make reasonable efforts to ensure that it has access to documentation of any change related to the delegation of rights, including a resident's revocation of delegated rights, to ensure that the resident's preferences, are being upheld for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for resident representative rights. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1, who was cognitively impaired when admitted to the facility, had had a representative who had the authority to make decisions on his behalf. This failure could…
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 before2023-04-26 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop 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 interview 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, mental and psychosocial needs for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #45) reviewed for care plans in that: Resident #45's comprehensive person-centered care plan indicated the resident was treated with medications for seizures when the resident was not This failure could place residents at risk of receiving inadequate interventions not individualized to their care needs. The findings were: Record review of Resident #45's face sheet, dated 4/25/23 revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia (impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions that interferes with doing everyday activities), epileptic seizures (disorder of the brain characterized by repeated seizures; a temporary change in the electrical functioning of the brain), bipolar…
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 before2023-04-26 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation in that: The facility failed to remove expired thickening liquid found within 1 of 1 kitchen dry food storage and 1 of 1 nutrition room. This failure could place residents at risk for cross-contamination and foodborne illnesses. The findings included: Observation on 4/25/23 beginning at 11:53 AM revealed 6 quarts of liquid thickener all dated EXP 3/5/23 within the dry food storage in the kitchen. Interview on 4/25/2022 at 2:31 PM, the DM stated he did not recall the liquid thickener and only saw the unexpired liquid thickener in the dry food storage. The DM stated anyone who entered the dry food storage was meant to remove any expired food, but he completed an unrecorded audit daily of the food in addition to when food delivery are made. The DM stated the risks associated with having food in the dry food storage was it may be served to residents and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-04-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an Infection Control Program designed to help prevent the development and transmission of disease and infection to include sanitizing of medical equipment for 3 of 3 Residents (#64, #57, and #60) reviewed in that: 1. The MA did not sanitize the blood pressure cuff before or after use with Resident #64. 2. The MA did not sanitize the blood pressure cuff before or after use with Resident #57. 3. The MA did not sanitize the blood pressure cuff before or after use with Resident #60. The failure could affect residents who had their blood pressure taken in the facility and placed the residents at risk for cross-contamination and the spread of infection. Findings included: Record Review of Resident #64 face sheet dated 04/26/2023, revealed the Resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included essential primary hypertension (high blood pressure), glaucoma (causes problems with vision), neuropathy ( nerve…
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.
- No harm found · C2023-04-26 · tag F0848 — widespreadProvide a neutral and fair arbitration process and agree to arbitrator and venue.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that the binding arbitration agreement provided for the selection of a venue that is convenient to both parties for three of three residents (Residents #45, #53, and #57) reviewed for facility compliance with requirements for binding arbitration agreements. The facility failed to ensure that its arbitration agreement provided for the selection of a venue that is convenient for both parties for Residents #45, #53, #57. These failures put residents and their representatives at risk of being uninformed about their rights regarding binding arbitration and less able to defend their rights related to disputes, controversy or claims arising out of or related to the services to be performed by the nursing facility. The findings included: Record review of Resident #45's face sheet, dated 4/25/23 revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia (impaired ability to remember, think, or make decisions that interferes…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
$14,611 in federal fines across 1 penalty.
- $14,611 — penalty dated 2024-02-16
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 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 | 5 of 5 | 3.2 | +1.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 4 of 5 | 2.8 | +1.2 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.7 | -0.7 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 5 of 5 | 4.4 | +0.6 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 | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| ALONZO, CARLOS | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 10/01/2022 |
| ATIQUE, RASHID | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 03/06/2024 |
| BURNAM, SOON | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 12/03/2021 |
| KEETCH, CHAD | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 03/01/2011 |
| THOMPSON, JOHNNY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 05/16/2024 |
| CRYSTAL LAKE HEALTHCARE, INC. | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 10/01/2022 |
| THE ENSIGN GROUP INC | Organization | ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/03/2021 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 12 rows in the source record cover these 7 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
2 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.
This home reported $1.0M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in TX
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 676325. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-31, 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.