The Mission At Blue Skies Of Texas East

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.

65.0% 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 161 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

Met the expected recovery: 51.6% 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 93 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 0.65 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 90% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 11% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

Staffing

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 80 beds and averages 55.5 residents a day — about 69% occupied, or roughly 24 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 4.87 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.80 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.72 is at or above 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 3.97 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.24 on weekdays — 24% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.88 to 0.59 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 58% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

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

Inspection trend

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

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

25 citations, most serious first. The 12 most serious are shown; the remaining 13 are one tap away and print in full.

• Immediate jeopardy · K2025-01-03 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — pattern
  Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices, for 1 of 13 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for diabetic medical interventions. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 had supporting orders for his diagnosis of diabetes mellitus upon admission to the facility from the hospital on [DATE] and led to Resident #1 not being assessed for daily blood sugar levels for the months of June 2024, August 2024, and September 2024, resulting on 10/18/2024, a hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c, a blood test that shows what your average blood sugar level was over the past two to three months) lab level of 9.9% (A1c normal level below 5.7; diabetes level = 6.5 or higher) and a finger stick blood sugar assessments of 300 at 06:00 AM and 453 at 06:00 PM (A healthy (normal) fasting blood glucose level for someone without diabetes is 70 to 99 mg/dL (3.9…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Past Non-Compliance
• Actual harm · G2024-03-04 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
  Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide the necessary treatment and services, based on the comprehensive assessment and consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent development of pressure injuries for 1 of 15 (Resident #1) residents reviewed for wound care in that: 1. The facility failed to ensure prompt wound care when a new wound to Resident #1's left and right lower leg was discovered on 11/21/23. The Wound Care Nurse D was first notified of the wounds on 11/28/23. 2. While performing Resident #1's left heel and right lower extremity wound care on 2/27/24, Wound Care Nurse D did not perform Resident #1's wound care as ordered by the physician. This deficient practice could affect residents who receive wound care and place them at risk for delayed wound healing. The findings were: 1. Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 2/27/24, revealed Resident #1's latest admission was 9/6/23 with diagnoses of senile degeneration of brain [loss of…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-08-08 · 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 interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a care plan to meet the resident's needs for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's care plan accurately documented the resident's need for supervision when actively eating/drinking. These failures could place residents at risk of their needs not being met. The findings include: Record review of Resident #1 's face sheet, dated 8/6/25, reflected an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged to hospital on 7/12/25. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included: heart failure, acute respiratory failure, prostate cancer, pacemaker, Bell's Palsy (dripping of the face), dementia (decline in mental ability), anxiety (a feeling of unease), lack of coordination, and dysphasia (difficulties swallowing). The RP was listed as: family member. Record review of Resident#1's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], reflected a BIMS score of 03, indicative of severe…

  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 before2025-08-08 · 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, the facility failed to maintain medical records, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, that were complete; and accurately documented for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for documentation. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's nurse progress notes accurately documented when the resident's vitals were taken. These failures could place residents at risk of their records not accurately documenting interventions, monitoring, and information provided to the interdisciplinary team. The findings include: Record review of Resident #1 's face sheet, dated 8/6/25, reflected an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged to hospital on 7/12/25. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included: heart failure, acute respiratory failure, prostate cancer, pacemaker, Bell's Palsy (dripping of the face), dementia (decline in mental ability), anxiety (a feeling of unease), lack of coordination, and dysphasia (difficulties…

  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 before2025-07-11 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to immediately inform the resident, consult with the resident's physician, and notify, consistent with his or her authority, the resident representatives when there was a significant change in resident's physical, mental, or psychosocial status for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #17) reviewed for physician notification of changes in condition. The facility failed to notify Resident #17's physician when his blood sugar levels were out of physician ordered parameters on 6/25/2025. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of not receiving adequate and timely intervention and a decline in condition. The findings included: Record review of Resident #17's face sheet dated 6/27/25 revealed a [AGE] year old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included heart failure, type 2 diabetes (chronic medical condition in which the body does not produce enough insulin or does not use insulin effectively), 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 Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-07-11 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
  Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
  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 a resident who is fed by enteral means receives the appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #151) reviewed for enteral feeding: The facility failed to ensure Resident #151's medications were diluted before administering the medications into the resident's feeding tube, did not label the resident's feeding formula and water containers with the appropriate identifiers and did not discard the feeding containers after the feeding was completed. This deficient practice could place residents who received enteral nutrition and medications at increased risk of aspiration, infection, bloating discomfort, and not receiving the full benefit of the medications administered. The findings included: Record review of Resident #151's face sheet dated 6/26/25 revealed a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included pneumonia (infection that…

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

  Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-11 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
  Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  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 (Resident #17) of 3 residents reviewed for medications. The facility failed to stock an emergency supply of Lispro (fast-acting insulin) to maintain Resident #17's medical condition during a medication absence resulting in a blood sugar level of 386. This failure could place the residents at risk of not receiving therapeutic doses of their medication. Findings included: Record review of Resident #17's face sheet dated 6/27/25 revealed a [AGE] year old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included heart failure, type 2 diabetes (chronic medical condition in which the body does not produce enough insulin or does not use insulin effectively), and chronic kidney disease stage 3 (moderate decrease…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-11 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolated
  Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
  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 the interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that 1 of 2 residents (Resident #17) reviewed for medication errors was free of any significant medication errors. The facility failed to administer Resident #17's insulin Lispro medication (a quick acting medication used to lower blood sugar) as prescribed. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of inadequate therapeutic outcomes, increased adverse side effects, and a decline in health. The findings included:Record review of Resident #17's face sheet dated 6/27/25 revealed a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included heart failure, type 2 diabetes (chronic medical condition in which the body does not produce enough insulin or does not use insulin effectively), and chronic kidney disease stage 3 (moderate decrease in kidney function due to damaged kidneys not filtering blood as well as they should, often caused by diabetes). Record review of Resident #17's most…

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

  Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
• Potential for harm · D2025-07-11 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
  Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 5 (memory unit) satellite kitchens. The facility failed to ensure dietary staff used facial hair restraints properly during plate preparation. This failure could place residents who received meals and/or snacks from the kitchen at risk for food borne illness. The findings included: Observation on 6/24/25 at 12:35 p.m. revealed CNA F was plating meals for the lunch service for residents in the memory unit. CNA F was observed wearing a facial hair restraint over his chin, but not over his moustache. CNA F continued to plate the lunch meal for residents in the memory unit while not wearing the facial hair restraint properly. Observation on 6/25/25 at 8:13 a.m. revealed CNA F plating a breakfast plate for residents in the memory unit and was observed wearing a facial hair restraint over his chin, but not over his moustache. CNA F, after observing the State Surveyor walk into the unit, pulled up…

  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 before2025-03-17 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — pattern
  Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
  What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

  NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to immediately consult with the resident's physician when there was a significant change in resident condition for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for physician notification of changes in condition. The facility failed to notify Resident #1's physician when his blood sugar levels were out of physician ordered parameters on 3/07/2025, 3/10/2025, 3/13/2025 and 3/14/2025. This deficient practice could affect residents with a change of condition and result in not receiving adequate and timely intervention and a decline in condition. The findings included: Record review of Resident #1 face sheet dated 3/14/2025 revealed an [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included: type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications, nontraumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage ( bleeding in the space between the brain and the membrane that covers it) [NAME] acute on chronic diastolic congestive heart failure (the heart's main pumping chamber…

  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 · Ecited before2025-03-17 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — pattern
  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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that were complete and accurately documented for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accuracy of records, in that: 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's 2:00 a.m. blood glucose readings were documented in his medical record on 2/24/2025, 2/27/2025, 3/02/2025, 3/03/2025, 3/04/2025 and 3/07/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's hospital stay from 2/11/2025-2/17/2025 were uploaded into his medical record. These failures could put residents at risk of resident medical records containing incomplete and/orinaccurate information affecting care. The findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #1 face sheet dated 3/14/2025 revealed an [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included: type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications, nontraumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage and acute on chronic diastolic congestive heart…

  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 before2025-03-17 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment, and describes services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's care plan was individualized specifically for to meet the resdient's needs for the diagnosis of diabetes mellitus based on physician order. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for not receiving proper care and services due to incomplete care plans. The findings included: Record review of Resident #1 face sheet dated 3/14/2025 revealed an [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included: type 2 diabetes mellitus without…

  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

$17,345 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

• $17,345 — penalty dated 2025-01-03

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.

Who owns this facility

CMS files one row per role, so the 64 rows in the source record cover these 23 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 $2.8M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 21% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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