Remington Transitional Care Of San Antonio

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.

66.4% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 406 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 60.0% 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 230 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 1.58 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 99% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 50% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy at close to weekday levels right through the weekend. 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.

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 60 beds and averages 59.5 residents a day — about 99% occupied, or roughly 0 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 4.47 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.98 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.79 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.68 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.78 on weekdays — 23% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.11 to 0.65 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

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

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

Inspection trend

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

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

23 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 13 are one tap away and print in full.

• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-12-15 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
  Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident that are complete, accurately documented, readily accessible, and systematically organized for one (1) of five (5) residents (Resident #1) reviewed for clinical records. The facility failed to ensure RN A documented a repeat blood pressure level when the initial level was below the approved range to administer Metoprolol Succinate (a blood pressure medication). This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the care and services needed due to inaccurate or incomplete clinical records. The findings included: Record review of Resident #1's admission Record, dated 12/13/2025, revealed a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE]. Resident #1 was listed as his own responsible party with his [family member] listed a secondary contact. Resident #1 discharged on 12/09/2025. Record review of Resident #1's EMR Medical Diagnosis tab, undated 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-11-18 · tag F0641 — isolated
  Ensure 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 observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the MDS assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 (Resident # 1) of 5 residents reviewed for MDS accuracy. Resident #1's re-entry MDS assessment from the hospital did not reflect the fall which resulted in a fracture and was the reason she went to the hospital. This failure affects residents who reside at the facility and could result in missed care.The findings included: Record review of Resident #1's electronic face sheet dated 11/18/2025 reflected she was an [AGE] year-old female who was originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], fell at the facility which resulted in a fracture, and she was sent to the hospital on [DATE]. She was then readmitted to the facility from the hospital on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included: fracture of the upper end of right humerus (upper arm bone), metabolic encephalopathy (diffuse brain dysfunction that can lead to confusion, memory loss and loss of consciousness) and chronic…

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

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-11-18 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
  Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for 1 (Resident #2) of 5 residents reviewed for implementation of care plans. Resident #2 did not have a floor mat on each side of his bed as was specified in his comprehensive plan of care for fall prevention. This failure affects residents at high risk for falls and could result in injury or disability. The findings included: Record review of Resident #2's electronic face sheet dated 11/18/2025 reflected he was a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His diagnoses included: displaced fracture of the left femur (type of fracture where the bone has broken and is out of alignment from its original position), atherosclerotic heart disease (characterized by plaque buildup in the artery walls which can restrict blood flow and lead to heart attacks or strokes), bipolar disorder (characterized by extreme mood swings that include emotional highs 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.

  Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-06-06 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
  Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, staff, and the public for 1 (Resident #28) out of 8 residents reviewed for environmental concerns. The facility failed on 06/03/2025 when Resident #28's window (1 of 2) would not close all the way in his room remaining open approximately 1-inch, which could have resulted in damage to the interior windowsill according to the Maintenance Director. The facility failed on 06/03/2025 when Resident #28's room refrigerator had not been functioning for an unknown amount of time resulting in Resident #28's RP not being able to bring in outside food for Resident #28. This failure could place residents at risk of a diminished quality of life due to exposure to an environment that was unpleasant, unsanitary, and unsafe. The findings included: Record review of Resident #28's admission record, dated 06/03/25, reflected Resident #28 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.

  Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-06-06 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — pattern
  Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that its medication error rate was not 5 percent or greater. The facility had a medication error rate of 17.24% based on 5 out of 29 opportunities, which involved 2 of 6 Residents (Resident #161 and Resident #171) reviewed for medication administration, in that: 1. The facility failed on 6/5/25 to ensure RN F observed if Resident #171 took her metoclopramide (used to treat various gastrointestinal conditions), pantoprazole (decreases the amount of acid produced in the stomach), and sucralfate (to treat an active duodenal ulcer. Sucralfate works mainly in the lining of the stomach and is not highly absorbed into the body.) medications. 2. The facility failed on 6/5/25 to ensure LVN G observed if Resident #161 took her docusate (stool softener used to treat constipation) and liquid protein (concentrated liquid protein supplement) medications. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving the intended therapeutic…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · E2025-06-06 · 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 drugs and biologicals were labeled and stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for 2 of 3 medication cart (200 hall east and west carts) reviewed for labeling and storage of drugs. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #31's furosemide package directions matched the physician orders blood pressure parameters on the 200-hall east cart. 2. The facility failed to ensure 200-hall west medication cart was not left unlocked and out of sight from the nurse. 3. The facility failed to provide change direction labels for Resident #161's medication package of allopurinol which had medication order change from 100 mg (1 tablet) to 150 mg (1.5 tablets) on the 200-hall west cart. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of medication misuse and diversion. The findings were: 1. During an observation on 6/5/25 at 8:18 a.m. the 200-hall east medication cart contained Resident #31's furosemide. The pharmacy label stated furosemide 20 tablet give 1 by mouth. Call for SBP…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-06-06 · tag F0803 — failed to meet residents' dietary needs — pattern
  Ensure menus must meet the nutritional needs of residents, be prepared in advance, be followed, be updated, be reviewed by dietician, and meet the needs of 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 interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure each resident received, and the facility provided food prepared in a form designed to meet resident choices for 2 of 8 residents (Resident #24 and #172) and 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for dietary needs. The facility failed to ensure there was not a repetitive menu for the residents resulting in complaints about the lack of variety in food options. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for poor food intake, weight loss, and not having their religious nutritional preferences met. Record review of Resident #24's admission record, dated 06/03/25, reflected Resident #24 was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses to include constipation. Record review of Resident #24's admission MDS assessment, dated 04/20/25, reflected Resident #24 had a BIMS score of 09 out of 15, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. It reflected no weight changes in the past 6 months. Record review of Resident #24's comprehensive…

  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 · Ecited before2025-06-06 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen. The facility failed to label their food products with their respective discard dates. These failures could place residents at risk for food borne illness. The findings included: Interview and observation on 06/03/25 at 09:55 AM, all packaged foods in the fridge, located off the tray line, had dates: 06/02/25 and 06/03/25 with no discard dates. The CDM and RD revealed they did not have to put the discard dates on the labels, but the kitchen staff knew to discard food products after 3 days. Interview and observation on 06/04/25 at 11:10 AM, all packaged food in the fridge, located off the tray line, reflected prepared date and discard dates. The CDM and RD revealed they put discard dates on the labels just to be safe, but their policy did not tell them to put discard dates. They revealed they do follow the FDA Food Code. The RD revealed it could be helpful to put discard dates, so…

  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 · Ecited before2025-06-06 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
  Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection 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 2 of 4 staff (RN F and LVN G) and 5 of 8 Residents (Resident #40, Resident #161, Resident #165, Resident #166, and Resident #217) reviewed for infection control: 1. The facility failed to ensure RN F sanitized the blood glucose monitor between use for Resident #166 and Resident #165. 2. The facility failed to ensure RN F did not touch pills with his bare hands and then administer the medication to Resident #40. 3. The facility failed to ensure RN F cleaned an insulin pen's rubber stopper with an alcohol swab prior to insulin administration for Resident #165. 4. The facility failed to ensure LVN G used a clean paper towel to turn of the sink after washing his hands during medication pass for Resident #161. 5. The facility failed…

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

  Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-06-06 · tag F0640 — isolated
  Encode each resident’s assessment data and transmit these data to the State within 7 days of 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 interviews and record reviews the facility failed to electronically transmit encoded, accurate, and complete MDS data to the CMS System, within 14 days, upon a resident's transfer, reentry, discharge, and death, for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #22 and #272) reviewed for transmitted MDS data to the CMS System. The facility failed to transmit a discharge MDS assessment to the CMS system for Resident #22 who discharged on 03/01/25 and #272 who discharged on 05/14/25 within 14 days of the discharge date . This failure could place residents at risk of not having assessments completed and submitted in a timely manner as required. The findings included: 1. A record review of Resident #22's admission record dated 06/06/24, revealed a [AGE] year-old male with an admission date of 12/16/24 and a discharge date of 03/01/25 with diagnoses that included pneumonia (infection that inflames air sacs in one or both lungs), acute respiratory failure with hypoxia (a condition where lungs are unable to adequately transfer…

  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

“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 WELLSENTIAL HEALTH — 67 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 34 rows in the source record cover these 29 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

15 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