No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Seymour Rehabilitation And Healthcare

1110 Westview Dr, Seymour, TX 76380 · Government - Hospital district · 90 certified beds · (940) 889-3176 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (940) 889-3176 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 20 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (20) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (68%) runs well above the national median (45%)

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.

5/5
CMS overall
5 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 5 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 2 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
(940) 495-4215 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
101 N Washington St · (940) 889-3622 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
202 N Main St · (940) 310-1955 · Call to confirm hours
Park
900 N Washington St · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1025 W California St · (940) 889-2425

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 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 3 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 4 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.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased28.3%15.8%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight2.7%3.0%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.4%0.3%0.9%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%0.8%2.0%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms1.4%2.4%6.5%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.0%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.8%3.3%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened16.0%14.0%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication19.7%18.0%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers5.7%3.8%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control16.9%13.4%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table15.9%9.6%17.1%typical
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.5%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%88.0%79.4%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.402.171.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days4.492.061.80worse

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.

10.7%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
0.18U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.16hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
<0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.18 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 18% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 3% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at 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.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.7%CMS range 7.0–15.810.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no 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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified95.5%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS 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 settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened18.2%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs1.461.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS 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

0.45
RN hours/ resident / day
1.26
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.56
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.27
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.37
RN hoursweekends
67.9%
Total nursing turnover
75.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 90 beds and averages 38.6 residents a day — about 43% occupied, or roughly 51 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.27 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.45 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.56 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 3.13 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.32 on weekdays — 6% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.48 to 0.37 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 68% 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

2
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-04-08)
6
at the previous standard inspection (2024-02-29)

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.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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.

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

  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-01-02 · 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 interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident that were complete and accurately documented for 2 (Resident #1, and #3) of 5 residents reviewed for medical records. The facility failed to ensure Residents #1 and #3 had accurate daily BS assessments and insulin injection documented in the medical record. These failures could place residents at risk due to inaccurate assessments.Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 12/30/2025 revealed a [AGE] year-old female, originally admitted to facility on 11/11/24 with most recent readmission on [DATE] and the following diagnoses: Dementia (mental decline caused by different diseases), type 2 diabetes (insulin resistance). Record review of Resident #1's MDS revealed, Section C-Cognitive Behavior BIMS score of 4 (severe cognitive impairment), Section N-Insulin Injections. Record review of Resident #1's Care Plan dated 9/4/25 revealed Resident #1 diabetes- monitor BS, diabetic diet. Record…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-05-16 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    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 residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good personal hygiene for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #6), reviewed for activities of daily living. The facility failed to provide timely incontinence care for Resident #6. These failures could place residents who were dependent on staff for ADL care at risk for loss of dignity, risk for infections, skin breakdown, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included: Resident #6 Review of Resident #6's Face Sheet, not dated, revealed a [AGE] year-old female, admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included: Obesity, abdominal hernia (a condition where a portion of an organ or tissue protrudes through a weak spot in the abdominal wall, often appearing as a bulge or lump), attention to colostomy (describes care for a surgical incised stoma through the abdomen and into the bowel to allow stool to exit the body to a colostomy…

    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 · E2025-04-08 · tag F0554 — pattern
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to self-administer medications if the interdisciplinary team determined that this practice was clinically appropriate for 1 of 5 resident (Resident #12) reviewed for medication self-administration. The facility did not assess Resident #12 for self-administration safety. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving medication as ordered and ingesting an incorrect amount of medication. Findings include: Record review of Resident #12's admission MDS, dated [DATE], and revealed a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #12 had diagnoses which included cancer, arthritis (joint inflammation), Alzheimer's disease (a disease that destroys memory and other mental functions), and rheumatoid arthritis (inflammatory disorder affecting joints). Her BIMS is 11. Scores between 0-7 indicate severe cognitive impairment, scores between 8 and 12 indicate moderate impairment,…

    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 before2025-04-08 · 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 in one of one kitchen reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to ensure the stainless-steel shelf units were not soiled with food particles and dried liquid. This failure could place residents at risk for foodborne illness and a decline in health status. The findings include: Observations on 04/06/2025 at 9:40 AM, during the initial tour of the facility kitchen, revealed the following: the floor behind the stove and stainless-steel shelf unit were soiled with food debris and dried liquid. Observations on 04/06/2025 at 9:50 AM revealed daily cleaning logs, dated April 2025, used for all the kitchen cleaning duties, revealed all cleaning duties for the morning had been completed and initialed by the kitchen staff who completed the cleaning task. In an interview on 04/07/2025 at 10:40 AM, the Dietary Manager stated her kitchen staff followed a daily cleaning schedule, but the dietary…

    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 · E2024-02-29 · tag F0730 — pattern
    Observe each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review the facility failed to review the work of each Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) at least once every 12 months, for 3 (CNA A, CNA B and CNA C) of 6 CNAs reviewed for annual competency evaluations. This deficient practice could affect residents and place them at risk of not receiving consistent, appropriate interventions necessary to meet the residents' needs. Findings included: Record Review of Personnel Files revealed the following: - Employee record for CNA A revealed a hire date of 08/02/2022, with no evidence of a competency evaluation in the past 12 months. - Employee record for CNA B revealed a hire date of 10/07/2022, with no evidence of a competency evaluation in the past 12 months. - Employee record for CNA C revealed a hire date of 01/10/2022, with no evidence of a competency evaluation in the past 12 months. In an interview on 02/29/24 at 11:39 AM, the Administrator stated the previous DON quit at the end of January of this year and boxed everything up. Documentation cannot be found confirming evidence of a competency evaluation had been…

    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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-02-29 · 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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to develop and implement care plans for necessary treatments and conditions for one of two residents (Resident #13) reviewed for Comprehensive Care Plans. The facility failed to develop Resident #13's care plan dated 12/04/2023 that addressed Resident 13's diagnosis of altered mental status and psychotic medication as ordered. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving care that was thoughtful, planned, and relevant to their condition(s) which could lead to complications in resident health and quality of life and care. The findings included: Record review of Resident #13's face sheet, dated 02/28/24, revealed a [AGE] year-old female, admitted to the facility on [DATE] and was re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #13 had a diagnosis of altered mental status (a symptom of a brain malfunction that affects behavior and awareness). Record review of Resident #13's Annual MDS, dated [DATE], revealed in Section I diagnoses…

    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 · D2024-02-29 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolated
    Provide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care, was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, the residents' goals, and preferences for 1 of 2 Residents (Resident #20) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #20's nasal cannula and nebulizer were kept in a bag while not in use . These failures could place residents at risk for infections and transmission of communicable diseases. Findings included: Record review of Resident # 20's Face Sheet dated 02/29/2024 revealed an [AGE] year-old male, who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnosis included pain, Hypertension (high blood pressure), Muscle wasting, Shortness of breath, Depression, Anxiety, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a lung disease that block airflow and make it difficult to breathe). Record review of Resident #20's MDS admission assessment dated [DATE] revealed…

    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 before2024-02-29 · 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, observation and record review the facility failed to, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, maintain medical records on each resident that were complete and accurately documented for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #22) reviewed for accuracy of medical records. The facility failed to ensure Resident #22 medical record was complete and included physician orders for oxygen. This failure could place residents at risk of receiving inadequate care and services. Findings included: Record review of Resident #22's face sheet, dated 02/28/24, revealed a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with the diagnosis of Chronic Obstruction Pulmonary Disease (chronic lung disease characterized by air flow limitation). In an observation and interview on 02/26/24 at 2:28 PM, Resident #22 was receiving oxygen by nasal cannula said that she has been on oxygen since she was admitted to the facility. Record review of Resident #22's Order Summary Report dated 02/28/24…

    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 · D2024-02-29 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    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 control program designed to prevent the development and transmission of infections. This affected 1 (Resident #27) of 1 resident observed for incontinent care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #27 was provided incontinent care by staff who demonstrated correct infection control procedures on 2/29/2024. This failure could place residents at risk of the spread of infection. Findings included: Record review of Resident #27's Face Sheet dated, 2/29/24, indicated a [AGE] year-old male. He was admitted to the facility initially on 9/25/21 with diagnoses that included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), anxiety disorder, and Essential Hypertension. Record review of Resident #27's admission MDS dated [DATE] indicated a BIMS of 12 or moderate cognitive impairment. Resident #27 required Extensive assist of one to two persons for ADLs and was always incontinent of bowel and bladder. Record review of Resident #27'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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-11-03 · tag F0757 — failed to avoid unnecessary drugs — pattern
    Ensure each resident’s drug regimen must be free from unnecessary drugs.
    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 each resident's drug regimen was free of unnecessary drugs for 1 of 1 residents (Resident # 1) whose medications were reviewed for unnecessary meds. Resident #1 (a male) received a female hormone replacement drug (Provera) for a diagnosis of inappropriate sexual behavior without documented clinical rationale for the benefit or adequate monitoring of behaviors. This failure could place residents at risk of undesirable side effects and cause a physical or psychosocial decline in health. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's Annual MDS, dated [DATE], indicated a [AGE] year-old male, who was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included: Dementia, personal history of malignant neoplasm of the prostate (a cancer in a man's prostate, a small walnut-sized gland that produces seminal fluid) psychotic disorder, anxiety, and mood disturbance. Record review of Resident #1s Annual MDS dated [DATE], revealed 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
Show the remaining 10 citations
  • Potential for harm · E2023-01-12 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — pattern
    Keep all essential equipment working safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to maintain all mechanical, electrical, and patient care equipment in safe operating condition for 3 (Resident #22,#24 and #30) who require glucometer checks for abnormal blood sugar on back hall (Zone 5). The glucometer used for checking resident blood sugars was not calibrated on 01/04/2023 and 01/05/2023 as recorded in the glucometer logbook. This failure could put residents at risk of inaccurate blood sugar levels potentially causing adverse reactions. The findings were: Review of facility glucometer log on 01/10/2023 at 12:05 AM revealed 2 days (01/04/2023 and 01/05/2023) calibration was not completed. During an interview on 01/11/2023 at 12:20 AM LVN A said she did not know why no one else calibrated the glucometer on 01/04/2023 or on 01/05/2023. She was not there on those days so apparently no one did the calibrations. She said she is aware the calibration for the glucometer needs to be accurate to ensure resident blood sugars are accurate. During observation on 01/12/2023 at 12:20 AM LVN A calibrated Assure® Platinum…

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

    Environmental Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-01-12 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected the health status for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #17) reviewed for assessment accuracy. Resident #17 was incorrectly assessed as not having received dialysis treatments on her most recent Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE]. The facility's failure could place the residents at risk for compromised heath status and for not receiving the proper care and services required to meet their individually assessed needs. The findings included: Review of Resident #17's Resident Face Sheet, dated 1/12/23, revealed she was a [AGE] year-old female, admitted to the facility on [DATE], with the diagnoses including: type 2 diabetes (too much sugar in the blood), end stage renal disease (kidney failure), and hypertension (high blood pressure). Review of Resident #17's Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 10/21/2022 revealed the resident was assessed as not having received dialysis treatments before coming to the facility or while a…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-01-12 · tag F0655 — isolated
    Create 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that includes the instructions needed to provide effective and person- centered care of the residents that meets professional standards of quality of care within 48 hours of a resident's admission for one (Resident #5) of seven residents reviewed for baseline care plans, in that: The facility failed to ensure a baseline care plan that included Resident #5's C-Collar was developed and implemented within 48 hours of admission. This failure could place residents at risk of not having their individualized needs met in a timely manner and communicated to providers which could result in injury, a decline in physical, mental and/or psychosocial well-being. Findings included: Review of Resident #5's undated Face Sheet revealed he was an [AGE] year-old-male admitted on [DATE] with the following diagnoses of non-displaced fracture of seventh vertebra sequent encounter for fracture with routine healing,…

    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 · D2023-01-12 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — isolated
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    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 the comprehensive care plan was reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #3 and Resident #22) for care plan revisions, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #3's and Resident #22's care plans were revised to indicate urinary catheter anchors were included to prevent trauma and urinary tract infections. This deficient practice caused tissue trauma, reoccurring urinary tract infections, and place residents at risk for inadequate care. The findings include: Review of Resident #3's undated Face Sheet revealed resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included dehydration (decline in body fluids), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, (difficulty breathing) urinary retention,(inability to urinate on their own) and dysphasia (difficulty swallowing). Review of Resident #3's quarterly MDS dated [DATE]…

    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 · D2023-01-12 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview. and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the comprehensive care plan was reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #3 and Resident #22) for care plan revisions, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #3's and Resident #22's care plans were revised to indicate urinary catheter anchors were included to prevent trauma and urinary tract infections. This deficient practice caused tissue trauma, reoccurring urinary tract infections, and place residents at risk for inadequate care. The findings include: Review of Resident #3's undated Face Sheet revealed resident was a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident's diagnoses included dehydration (decline in body fluids), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, (difficulty breathing) urinary retention,(inability to urinate on their own) and dysphasia (difficulty swallowing). Review of Resident #3's quarterly MDS dated [DATE]…

    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 · D2023-01-12 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolated
    Ensure therapeutic diets are prescribed by the attending physician and may be delegated to a registered or licensed dietitian, to the extent allowed by State law.
    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 1of 1 resident (Resident #195) reviewed for therapeutic diets received the diet ordered per physician orders. The facility failed to provide Resident #195 a reduced concentrated sweets diet at lunch on 01/10/23 and 01/11/23. This failure placed residents receiving therapeutic diets at risk for nutritional deficits, undesired weight gain or loss and a decline in health. Findings included: Record review of the face sheet for Resident #195 dated 1/12/23 indicated the resident was an [AGE] year-old female readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnosis included diabetes ( a medical condition causing high blood sugar), Alzheimer's, and dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) . Review of the Quarterly MDS assessment, dated 12/19/2022 for Resident #195, indicated the resident had a Brief Interview for Mental Status score of 7 which indicated severe cognitive impairment. The MDS indicated the resident required supervision and assistance of 1 for…

    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 · Dcited before2023-01-12 · 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 distribute food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for residents who eat in the facility's only dining room. The Dietary Aide failed to prevent potential cross contamination by accepting a resident's personal cup, (Resident #11) not sanatizing or gloving prior to accepting resident's cup, returning to the kitchen during meal service, and filling the cup with a drink without wearing gloves or sanatizing hands. These failures could place residents at-risk of cross contamination which could result in infections or illness. Findings included: During meal service on 01/10/2023 at 12:00 Noon Resident #11 was observed going to the kitchen door in his wheelchair and handing his personal cup to the Dietary Aide to fill with a drink. The Dietary Aide accepted the drink without gloves and returning to the kitchen, filled the cup, and returned the cup to Resident #11. Resident #11 returned to his place in the dining room. During an interview with the Dietary Manager on 01/11/2023 at 1:05 PM…

    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
  • No harm found · C2024-02-29 · tag F0582 — widespread
    Give residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
    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 provide both a Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage (Form CMS-10055) and a Notice of Medicare Non-coverage (Form CMS-10123 general notice) for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #6 and Resident #7) reviewed for Medicare Beneficiary Protection Notification when discharged from Medicare Part A Services with benefit days remaining. The facility failed to ensure Resident #6, and Resident #7 were given a Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage (Form CMS-10055) in addition to the Notice of Medicare Non-coverage (Form CMS-10123 general notice) when they were discharged from skilled services. These failures could place residents at risk of not being fully informed about services covered by Medicare. The findings included: Record review of Resident #6's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], revealed an [AGE] year-old female, admitted to the facility on [DATE]. The resident had a diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease (A type…

    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
  • No harm found · Bcited before2024-02-29 · tag F0912 — pattern
    Provide rooms that are at least 80 square feet per resident in multiple rooms and 100 square feet for single resident rooms.
    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 required minimum of 80 square feet of room space per resident in 1 of 40 double occupancy resident rooms by failing to provide a minimum of 160 square feet in resident room # 13. This deficient practice could place residents who may occupy double occupancy resident rooms at risk of not having the personal living space to meet their needs. The findings included: In an interview on 02/26/2024 at 11:30 AM, during entrance conference, the administrator stated the facility had a room size waiver for resident room [ROOM NUMBER] and wished to continue the waiver. In an observation on 02/26/2024 at 11:45 AM, room [ROOM NUMBER] was measured at 156 square feet and did not meet the required minimum of 160 square feet for a double occupancy resident room. Review of the facility's Bed Classifications Form 3762, signed and dated 02/29/2024 by the facility's administrator, documented resident room [ROOM NUMBER] was licensed and certified as a…

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

    Environmental Deficiencies · Waiver has been granted
  • No harm found · Bcited before2023-01-12 · tag F0912 — pattern
    Provide rooms that are at least 80 square feet per resident in multiple rooms and 100 square feet for single resident rooms.
    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 required minimum of 80 square feet of room space per resident in 1 of 40 double occupancy resident rooms by failing to provide a minimum of 160 square feet in resident room # 13. This deficient practice could place residents who may occupy double occupancy resident rooms at risk of not having the personal living space to meet their needs. The findings included: In an interview on 01/10/2023 at 9:30 AM, during entrance conference, the administrator stated the facility had a room size waiver for resident room [ROOM NUMBER] and wished to continue the waiver. In an observation on 01/10/2023 at 11:30 AM, room [ROOM NUMBER] was measured at 156 square feet and did not meet the required minimum of 160 square feet for a double occupancy resident room. The facility's Bed Classifications Form 3740, signed and dated 01/10/2023 by the facility's administrator, documented resident room [ROOM NUMBER] was licensed and certified as a double…

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

    Environmental Deficiencies · Waiver has been granted

“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.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • 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.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to ADVANCED HEALTHCARE SOLUTIONS — 28 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 →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 52.9+2.1 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 52.8+2.2 vs chain
Staffing 2 of 52.0≈ chain avg
Quality measures 3 of 54.0-1.0 vs chain
The other 27 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.9★, per CMS)
1 of 5Advanced Health & Rehab Center of GarlandGarland, TX 1 of 5Advanced Rehabilitation and Healthcare of AthensAthens, TX 1 of 5El Paso Health & Rehabilitation CenterEl Paso, TX 1 of 5Greenville Health & Rehabilitation CenterGreenville, TX 1 of 5Tomball Rehab & NursingTomball, TX 1 of 5Winfield Rehab & NursingCrockett, TX 2 of 5Advanced Rehabilitation & Healthcare of BurlesonBurleson, TX 2 of 5Balch Springs Nursing HomeBalch Springs, TX 2 of 5Henderson Health & Rehabilitation CenterHenderson, TX 2 of 5Heritage House at Paris Rehab & NursingParis, TX 2 of 5McAllen Nursing CenterMcAllen, TX 3 of 5Clarksville Nursing CenterClarksville, TX 3 of 5Palo Pinto Nursing CenterMineral Wells, TX 3 of 5Prairie House Living CenterPlainview, TX 3 of 5Santa Fe Health & Rehabilitation CenterWeatherford, TX 3 of 5Sulphur Springs Health And RehabilitationSulphur Springs, TX 3 of 5The Renaissance At Kessler ParkDallas, TX 3 of 5Whitehall Rehab & NursingCrockett, TX 3 of 5Willow Rehab & NursingKilgore, TX 4 of 5Advanced Rehabilitation And Healthcare Of VernonVernon, TX 4 of 5Advanced Rehabilitation and Healthcare of WichitaWichita Falls, TX 4 of 5Crowell Nursing CenterCrowell, TX 4 of 5Mesquite Tree Nursing CenterMesquite, TX 4 of 5Whispering Oaks Rehab & NursingCuero, TX 5 of 5Advanced Rehabilitation And Healthcare Of BowieBowie, TX 5 of 5Clyde Nursing CenterClyde, TX 5 of 5Heritage House At Keller Rehab & NursingKeller, TX

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 / managerTypeRoleShareSince
BAYLOR COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 10/01/2014
HARDIN, LESLIEIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; CORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/01/2014
ADVANCED HCS LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2021
LICHTSCHEIN, TEDDYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2021
SCHEINER, ELIEZERIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2021
SHELBY, JACKIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2021

CMS files one row per role, so the 7 rows in the source record cover these 6 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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.

$3.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-18.5%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 82%Medicare 8%Other / private 10%

About 82% of this home’s resident-days are paid by Medicaid, which reimburses well below the cost of care in most states. Heavily Medicaid-dependent homes run on thinner budgets — a context worth holding next to the staffing and inspection record, not a fault in itself. 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

$252per resident / day
operating cost
$7,647per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$212per day
avg. revenue, all payers

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

Paying with Medicaid

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.

Typical monthly cost in Texas
$5,627/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$7,604/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,666/mo
Assisted living

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 675042. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-04-08, 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.

What to do next