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

Wellington Rehabilitation and Healthcare

1802 S 31St, Temple, TX 76504 · Government - Hospital district · 124 certified beds · (254) 778-4231 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse/neglect citation on record (F0600) — cited Jul 20242 immediate-jeopardy citations2 immediate-jeopardy citations CMS recorded as corrected before the inspection ended (past non-compliance)$32,275 in federal fines
Insights

This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jul 2024
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • inspectors cited 2 immediate-jeopardy problems — the most serious level
  • inspectors recorded 2 serious findings as past non-compliance — the problem was found, fixed, and verified before the survey closed, so it is history rather than a current condition, but it is still worth asking what changed
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (28) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • the CMS record shows $32,275 in federal fines (most recent 2026-02-17)
  • its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
  • nursing-staff turnover (78%) 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.

2/5
CMS overall
2 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 1 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1516 S 31st St # A · (254) 778-6626 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
3002 S 31st St · (254) 773-2177 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
H-e-b<0.1 mi
3002 S 31st St · (254) 778-4820 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1735 S 19th St · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
1921 S 33rd St · (254) 760-2916

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 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 4 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 1 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 rating1★
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 increased28.7%15.8%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight4.6%3.0%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.3%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.4%0.8%2.0%worse than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms9.0%2.4%6.5%worse 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 injury2.2%3.3%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened47.5%14.0%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication12.2%18.0%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine94.5%98.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers2.3%3.8%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control21.4%13.4%21.2%typical
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table7.9%9.6%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication1.8%1.5%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine78.0%88.0%79.4%typical
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission11.8%25.7%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit11.1%12.3%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.662.171.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.872.061.80better

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.

57.2% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 26 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

57.2%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
39.1%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.55U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.18hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.25hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.12hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 39.1% 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 23 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 0.55 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 85% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 15% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF57.2%CMS range 40.2–73.651.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.8%CMS range 7.3–16.410.7%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 discharge39.1%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge60.9%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge47.8%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified81.4%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 worsened0.0%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 hospitalization8.1%CMS range 4.5–13.67.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.811.02Oct 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

0.39
RN hours/ resident / day
0.85
LPN hours/ resident / day
1.79
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.03
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.16
RN hoursweekends
78.4%
Total nursing turnover
75.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 124 beds and averages 70.7 residents a day — about 57% occupied, or roughly 53 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 3.03 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.39 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.79 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.42 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.28 on weekdays — 26% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.48 to 0.16 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 78% is well above the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-06-05)
7
at the previous standard inspection (2024-04-25)

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.

28 citations, most serious first. The 14 most serious are shown; the remaining 14 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2026-02-17 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure that the resident received adequate supervision and assistance with devices to prevent accidents for 1 (Resident #1) of 6 residents reviewed for accidents and hazards.The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 did not elope from the facility on 1/10/2026, Resident #1 eloped was found in the alley behind the facility, attempting to get to the end of the alley where a coffee shop was located.This failure could result in serious injuries to residents and potentially death.The noncompliance was identified as PNC. This failure resulted in an identification of an (IJ) Immediate Jeopardy on January 10th, 2026, at 11:06 am. The IJ template was provided to the ADM and DON on February 17th, 2026, at 05:05 pm. The IJ was removed on January 11th, at 08:30 am, due to the facility implementing interventions to ensure the safety of the residents A record review on February 17th, 2026, of Resident #1's face-sheet reflected that Resident #1 was a 60year-old-male…

    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
  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2025-06-24 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    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 each resident received adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was transferred safely, with a gait belt, correct positioning and with at least two staff, by CNA B when Resident #1 fell and sustained a femur (thigh bone) fracture which required surgery on 06/10/2025. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified on 06/13/2025. While the IJ was removed on 06/15/2025, the facility remained out of compliance at a scope of isolated with a potential for more than minimal harm, due to the facility's need to evaluate the of the corrective systems . This failure could place residents at risk of unsafe transfers, falls, injuries, hospitalizations and/or death. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 06/16/2025, reflected an [AGE] year-old man who was admitted to the facility on [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
  • Immediate jeopardy · J2025-06-24 · tag F0726 — failed to have competent, trained nursing staff — isolated
    Ensure that nurses and nurse aides have the appropriate competencies to care for every resident in a way that maximizes each resident's well being.
    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 nurse aides were able to demonstrate competency in skill and techniques necessary to care for resident's needs, as identified through resident assessments, and described in the plan of care for 1 of 4 (Resident #1) related to safe transfers. The facility failed to ensure CNA B used the accurate technique to transfer Resident #1 safely (with gait belt, correct positioning and/or two-people) on 06/10/2025. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation was identified on 06/23/2025. While the IJ was removed on 06/24/2025, the facility remained out of compliance at a scope of isolated with a potential for more than minimal harm, due to the facility's need to evaluate the effectiveness of the corrective systems . This failure could place residents at risk of avoidable falls, injuries, hospitalization and/or death. Findings include: Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 06/16/2025 reflected an [AGE] year-old man admitted on [DATE] with discharge day 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.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Immediate jeopardy · Jcited before2024-11-21 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible and each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 of 10 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents and supervision. The facility failed to prevent Resident #1 from eloping on 09/27/2024. The non-compliance was identified as PNC. The facility had corrected the non-compliance on 9/27/2024 before the investigation/complaint began. This deficient practice could place residents who were elopement risks at-risk of harm, serious injury, or death. The findings were: During an interview on 11/20/24 at 12:23 PM with Resident #1, he stated he didn't remember what he was going to HEB for. He stated he was going for a machine for his head. Resident #1 was advised there were no machines for his head there and he stated well he doesn't know what he was there for. Record review of Resident # 1's face sheet, dated 11/27/2024, revealed a [AGE] year-old male…

    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
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-27 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to incorporate the recommendations from the PASARR level II determination and the PASARR evaluation report into a resident's assessment, care planning, and transitions of care for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for PASARR services. The facility failed to submit an NFSS request within 20 business days of Resident #1's IDT meeting held on 04/23/25. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the required care and services to attain and maintain their highest, practicable, physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Findings include: Review of Resident #1's admission Record, dated 08/27/25, reflected she was a [AGE] year old female who was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #1 had medical diagnoses that included osteitis deformans of multiple sites (a chronic metabolic disorder where bone turnover is accelerated and disordered), epilepsy (a brain disorder causing…

    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 · D2025-06-24 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    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 have evidence that all alleged violations were thoroughly investigated and failed to prevent further potential abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment while the investigation was in progress for 1 of four residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility failed to thoroughly investigate a fall in which Resident #1 sustained a femur (thigh bone) fracture on 06/10/2025 during a transfer by CNA B. This failure could place residents at risk of further abuse, physical harm, mental anguish and emotional distress. Findings include: Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 06/16/2025 reflected an [AGE] year-old man admitted on [DATE] with discharge day of 06/10/2025 with diagnoses of vascular parkinsonism (disease that is caused by damage to blood vessels in the brain that leads to movement and balance problems that particularly affect the lower body), unspecified atrial fibrillation (irregular or rapid heartbeat), dysphagia (difficulty…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-06-05 · tag F0645 — isolated
    PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
    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 individuals with mental health disorders were provided an accurate PASARR for 1 of 2 residents (Residents #36) reviewed for PASARR Level 1 screenings. The facility failed to notify the local authority of the PASARR I screen for Residents #36. This failure could affect residents with mental illness placing them at risk for a diminished quality of life and not receiving necessary care and services in accordance with individually assessed needs. Findings included: Record review of a Face Sheet dated 06/05/25 for Resident #36 revealed a [AGE] year-old female admitted initially to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included post-traumatic stress disorder (is a mental health condition that's caused by an extremely stressful or terrifying event - either being part of it or witnessing it), bi-polar disorder, in full remission, most recent episode depressed (is a serious mental illness characterized by severe mood swings.…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-07-16 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — pattern
    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 interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who is incontinent of bladder receives appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections to the extent possible for one (Resident #1) of four residents reviewed for indwelling urinary catheters, in that: The facility failed to implement a batch order for daily catheter care when Resident #1 was admitted on [DATE] and failed to provide daily catheter care for Resident #1 from 7/2/2024 until 7/10/2024. This failure could place residents with indwelling urinary catheters at risk of sepsis, renal failure, urinary tract infections, and pain. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 7/14/2024 reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: Cellulitis (bacterial skin infection), Chronic Kidney Disease, Morbid Obesity (severely overweight), Hypertension (high blood pressure), Congestive Heart Failure, Major Depressive Disorder (type of depression),…

    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 · D2024-07-16 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolated
    Protect each resident from all types of abuse such as physical, mental, sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect by anybody.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from physical abuse by facility staff for one (Resident #2) of ten residents reviewed for abuse, in that: The facility failed to protect Resident #2 from physical abuse by LVN A on 6/3/2024 when LVN A pulled on Resident #2's wheelchair causing him to fall to the ground. This failure placed residents at risk of not being protected from abuse, neglect, or exploitation. Findings included: Review of Resident #2's face sheet dated 7/14/2024 reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: Alzheimer's Disease (progress memory loss disease), Type 2 Diabetes (blood sugar disorder), Asthma (breathing disorder), Dementia (memory loss disorder), Hypertension (high blood pressure) and Osteoporosis (bone density disorder). Review of Resident #2's quarterly MDS assessment reflected a BIMS score of 11 suggesting mild cognitive impairment. Further review of the MDS reflected…

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

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-08 · 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 notify the resident's physician when there was a significant change in the resident's physical status for one (Resident #1) of four residents reviewed for resident rights, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's NP was notified until the 5th day of her experiencing constipation. This failure placed residents at risk of illness, uncontrolled pain, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's undated face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including irritable bowel syndrome, chronic pain, morbid obesity, and panic disorder. Review of Resident #1's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 04/22/24, reflected a BIMS score of 15, indicating no cognitive impairment. Section H (Bowel and Bladder) reflected she was always incontinent of her bowels. Review of Resident #1's quarterly care plan, dated 04/11/24, reflected she had bowel/bladder incontinence…

    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 · E2024-04-25 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — pattern
    Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences except when to do so would endanger the health or safety of the resident or other residents for 3 of 5 residents (Resident #14, Resident #34, and Resident #153 ) reviewed for accommodation of needs. The facility failed to ensure resident call lights were placed within their reach. This failure could place residents at risk of injuries and unmet needs. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #153's, undated, face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #153 had diagnoses which included protein calorie malnutrition, abnormal weight loss, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), aphasia (a language disorder that affects a person's ability to communicate), and vascular parkinsonism (a condition which presents difficulty walking and maintaining balance…

    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 before2024-04-25 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed ensure residents had the right to a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, in that: 1. The facility failed to ensure resident room floors in halls 200 and 300 didn't have a buildup of stains and physical dirt, scratches, peeling and chipping paint on the walls. 2. The facility failed to ensure the furniture wood was not chipping. 3. The facility failed to ensure there was not a strong urine odor in the facility upon entrance to the building. 4. The facility failed to ensure there were no dirty clothes on the floors of residents closets. 5. The facility failed to ensure the community showers on the halls didn't have soap scum. 6. The facility failed to ensure the toilets were not leaking in the residents rooms. These failures could place residents at risk of a diminished quality of life. Findings included: During an observation on 04/23/2024 at 8:30 AM revealed upon entrance in the door, there was a strong urine odor in the…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-04-25 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
    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 observation , interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming and personal and oral hygiene for 3 of 3 residents (Residents #7, #40 and #104) reviewed for ADL care. The facility failed to ensure Residents #7, #40 and #104 received their bath/showers three times a week as per their shower schedule. This failure could place residents at risk of skin breakdown, infection, and loss of self-esteem. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #7's face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #7 had diagnoses which included Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with Unspecified Complications (a problem in the way the body regulates and uses sugar as a fuel), Stage 3 Pressure Ulcer Of Sacral Region (involves the full thickness of the skin and may extend into the subcutaneous tissue layer; granulation tissue and epiboly rolled…

    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 · E2024-04-25 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — pattern
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    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 a drug regimen review for each resident was reviewed at least once a month by a licensed pharmacist for five of five reviewed for drug regimen review. The facility failed to document an MRR for Residents# 1, 15, 8, 34 and 22 for the months of January, February and March 2024. This failure could place residents at risk of adverse drug consequences and a decline in their physical and mental health status. Findings include: 1. Record review of the facility's pharmacy monthly review reports for Resident #15, reflected Resident is given Buspirone HCl for anxiety. There is no MRR documentation the doctor has conducted a monthly or frequent review of the residents medical record January, February and March 2024. Record review for Resident #15 medical diagnosis sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #15 had diagnoses which included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Unspecified (refers to a group…

    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 14 citations
  • Potential for harm · E2024-04-25 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure, in accordance with State and Federal laws, all drugs and biologicals were stored in locked compartments under proper temperature controls and permitted only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for 1 of 2 medication carts (Medication Cart #1) reviewed for medication storage . The facility failed to ensure Medication Cart # 1 was not left unattended and unlocked. This failure could place residents at risk of obtaining access to prescription and over-the-counter medication, that could cause overdose, allergic reactions, poisoning or exacerbation of illness and symptoms. Findings include: Observation on 04/24/2024 at 4:32 PM revealed Medication Cart #1 was against a wall in a resident hallway. Three residents walked by the unattended and unlocked medication cart. There were no visible facility staff on the hallway at that time. Observation on 04/24/2024 at 4:34 PM revealed Medication Cart #1 remained unattended and unlocked. There were no visible facility staff on the hallway at that time .…

    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 · D2024-04-25 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    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 observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #8) reviewed for physician orders. The facility failed to obtain a physician's order prior to providing treatment for an open wound to the right lower forearm for Resident #8. This deficient practice could place residents at-risk of inadequate monitoring and treatment of medical conditions and an infection of the skin wound. The findings were: Record review of Resident #8's, undated, face sheet reflected [AGE] year-old female who readmitted to the facility from the hospital 04/14/24. Resident #8 had diagnoses which included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (a group of lung diseases that block airflow and make it difficult to breathe), Diabetes Type 2 (elevated blood sugar), Intermittent Asthma (bronchial spasms), Heart Failure (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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-04-25 · 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 needed respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents goals and preferences for 1 of 5 residents (Residents #8) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #8's oxygen concentrator had a clean filter in place, humidifier was filled and dated, and tubing was changed as ordered by physician. This failure could place residents at risk for respiratory infections . Findings include: Record review of Resident #8's, undated, face sheet reflected [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #8 had diagnoses which included Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (a group of lung diseases that block airflow and make it difficult to breathe), Diabetes Type 2 (elevated blood sugar), Intermittent Asthma (bronchial spasms), Heart Failure (a condition where the 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-09-19 · tag F0675 — failed to support quality of life — pattern
    Honor each resident's preferences, choices, values and beliefs.
    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 care and services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being consistent with the resident's comprehensive assessment and plan of care for three of six residents (Residents #1, #2 and #3) reviewed for quality of life. The facility failed to answer Resident #1, Resident #2 and Resident #3 call lights in a timely manner. The failure could place residents at risk for complications associated with delayed care such as skin breakdown and dignity issues. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #1's face sheet revealed a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included: Acute Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia, Dysarthria and Dysphagia Following Cerebral Infarction, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with Other Circulatory Complications, Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis Following Cerebral Infarction Affecting Right Dominant Side,…

    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 · D2023-09-19 · tag F0636 — isolated
    Assess the resident completely in a timely manner when first admitted, and then periodically, at least every 12 months.
    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 a comprehensive assessment was completed within 14 calendar days after admission, excluding readmissions in which there was no significant change in the resident's physical or mental condition, for one of one resident record reviewed for comprehensive assessments. Resident #1 did not have a completed admission/comprehensive MDS assessment within 14 days following his admission to the facility. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the proper care required to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well-being. Findings include: Record review of Resident #1's admission record, dated 07/18/23, revealed a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. His admitting diagnoses included Acute Respiratory Failure with Hypoxia, Dysarthria and Dysphagia Following Cerebral Infarction, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with Other Circulatory Complications, Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis Following…

    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 · Ecited before2023-03-02 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain ensure residents had the right to a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, which included but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely for 3 of 10 residents (Residents #12, #17, and #35) reviewed for homelike environment. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #12's room and bathroom was not in a state of disrepair. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #17's room and bathroom were clean and not in a state of disrepair. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #35's room was clean and free of debris under his bed. 4. The facility failed to ensure the intake vent on the floor next to Hall 300 nurses' station was clean of dirt and debris. These failures could place residents at risk for a diminished quality of life and a diminished clean, homelike environment. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #12's, undated, face sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted…

    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 before2023-03-02 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — pattern
    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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living, received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 4 of 10 residents (Resident #109, Resident #12, Resident #14, and Resident #24) reviewed for ADL's. The facility failed to ensure Resident #109, Resident #12, Resident #14 and Resident #24 fingernails were trimmed and clean. This failure could place residents at risk of scratches, infections, and poor self-esteem. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #109's, undated, face sheet reflected she [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Pressure Ulcer of right buttock Stage 3 (bedsore that goes through all layers of skin into the fat tissue), Benign Neoplasm of Meninges (non-cancerous tumor that arises form membranes surrounding the brain and spinal cord), Vascular Dementia (brain damage caused by multiple…

    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 · E2023-03-02 · tag F0679 — failed to provide activities — pattern
    Provide activities to meet all resident's needs.
    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, based on the comprehensive assessment and care plan and the preferences of each resident, an ongoing program to support residents in their choices of activities, both facility-sponsored group and individual activities and independent activities, designed to meet the interests of and support the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, encouraging independence and interaction in the community for 3 of 4 residents (Residents #14, #24 and #160) reviewed for activities. The facility failed to consistently provide activities for Resident #14, Resident #24 and Resident #160. This failure could place residents at risk for a decline in social, mental, psychosocial well-being and a decreased quality of life. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident # 14's face sheet, dated 03/02/2023, reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE]. Resident #14 had 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-03-02 · tag F0692 — failed to prevent malnutrition and dehydration — pattern
    Provide enough food/fluids to maintain a resident's health.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were maintaining acceptable parameters of nutritional status for 13 (Resident #1, #2, #3, #4, #9, #15, #16, #18, #24, #29, #32, #42 and #44) residents out of 30 residents reviewed for accurate weights. The facility failed to establish a consistent method of weighing residents to ensure accuracy of resident weights. These failures put residents at risk for undetectable weight loss, malnutrition, and poor quality of life. Findings included: Review of Monthly Weight Report dated 03/02/2023 revealed Resident #24's weights to be: December 2022 - 141.2 lbs January 2023 - 128.8 lbs February 2023 - 126.8 lbs Review of Monthly Weight Report dated 03/02/2023 revealed Resident #18's weights to be: December 2022 - 209.4 lbs January 2023 - 213.0 lbs February 2023 - 202.0 lbs Review of Monthly Weight Report dated 03/02/2023 revealed Resident #1's weights to be: December 2022 - 186.4 lbs January 2023 - 213.0 lbs February 2023 - 196.4 lbs Review of Monthly Weight Report dated 03/02/2023 revealed Resident #32's weights to…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2023-03-02 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 3 of 4 residents (Resident # 14, Resident # 24, and Resident # 42 reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to follow the infection control protocol. This failure could place residents at risk of transmission of infectious diseases. The findings include: 1. Record review of Resident # 14's face sheet, dated 03/02/2023, reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included unspecified lack of coordination (prevents people from being able to control the position of their arms and legs or their posture), muscle weakness (reduced strength in one or more muscles), other reduced mobility (mobility is limited), weakness (a decrease in…

    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 · D2023-03-02 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident was treated with respect and dignity and care in a manner and in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality for one of five residents (Resident #7) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7 was fed by a staff member sitting at eye level rather than standing over her. This failure could place residents at risk for a diminished quality of life, loss of dignity and self-worth. Findings included: Record review of Resident #7's, undated, face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Spastic Quadriplegic Cerebral Palsy (brain damage before birth, during or shortly after causing muscles to be stiff and movements jerky), Acquired Hemolytic Anemia (disorder in which red blood cells are destroyed faster than they can be made), Dysphagia…

    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 · D2023-03-02 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
    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 and the facility promoted and facilitated resident self-determination through support of resident choice, which included but not limited to the right to make choices about aspects of his or her life in the facility that were significant to the resident for 1 of 10 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for self-determination. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4 was allowed to choose the type of liquids he preferred when he expressed he would not drink nectar thick liquids. This failure could place residents at risk for being denied the opportunity to exercise his or her autonomy regarding things that were important in their life and a decrease in their quality of life. Findings include: Record review of Resident #4 face sheet, dated 03/02/2023, revealed an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included acute respiratory failure with hypoxia, high blood pressure,…

    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 · D2023-03-02 · 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 observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that included the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that met professional standards of quality or care and failed to ensure a care plan was developed within 48 hours of a resident's admission for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #159 and Resident #160) reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility failed to complete a baseline care plan for Resident #159 and Resident #160 within the required 48-hour timeframe. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving necessary care and services or having important care needs identified and met. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #159's face sheet, dated 03/01/2023, reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included cellulitis of left lower limb (potentially serious bacterial skin infection, with inflammation and…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-03-02 · 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 a resident who needed respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning, was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, the residents' goals and preferences for two of six residents (Resident #111 and #14) reviewed for respiratory care. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #111's oxygen tubing was dated. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #14's oxygen concentrator had a humidifier bottle per physician orders. These failures could place residents at risk for discomfort and respiratory infections. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #111's, undated, face sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] for Hospice Respite care with diagnoses which included Acute on Chronic Congestive Heart Failure (damage to the heart which may have developed over time), Covid-19 (viral illness), Type 2…

    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

“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

$32,275 in federal fines across 3 penalties.

  • $8,281 — penalty dated 2026-02-17
  • $15,167 — penalty dated 2025-06-24
  • $8,827 — penalty dated 2024-11-21

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to THE ENSIGN GROUP — 342 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 2 of 53.2-1.2 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
Staffing 1 of 52.7-1.7 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.4-0.4 vs chain
The other 341 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.2★, per CMS)
1 of 5Aspen Health And WellnessOverland Park, KS 1 of 5Bennett Hills Rehabilitation and Care CenterGooding, ID 1 of 5Broadway By The SeaLong Beach, CA 1 of 5Chatsworth Park Health Care CenterChatsworth, CA 1 of 5Clarion Wellness and Rehabilitation CenterClarion, IA 1 of 5Colonial Manor of RandolphRandolph, NE 1 of 5Durango Health And RehabilitationDurango, CO 1 of 5Fort Dodge Health and RehabilitationFort Dodge, IA 1 of 5Greater Southside Health and RehabilitationDes Moines, IA 1 of 5Hearthstone Health And RehabilitationSparks, NV 1 of 5Heritage Gardens Rehabilitation and HealthcareCarrollton, TX 1 of 5Hillcrest Health Care CenterHawarden, IA 1 of 5Lake Village Nursing And Rehabilitation CenterLewisville, TX 1 of 5Lakeside Rehabilitation and Care CenterCoeur d'Alene, ID 1 of 5Legend Oaks Healthcare And Rehabilitation - NorthAustin, TX 1 of 5Legend Oaks Healthcare And Rehabilitation - WaxahaWaxahachie, TX 1 of 5Legend Oaks Healthcare and Rehabilitation - Fort WKeller, TX 1 of 5Madera Post Acute CenterEl Monte, CA 1 of 5Medallion Post Acute RehabilitationColorado Springs, CO 1 of 5Mesquite Post Acute CareLubbock, TX 1 of 5Millbrook Healthcare and Rehabilitation CenterLancaster, TX 1 of 5Misty Willow Healthcare and Rehabilitation CenterHouston, TX 1 of 5New Orange HillsOrange, CA 1 of 5Northeast Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterSan Antonio, TX 1 of 5Northgate PlazaIrving, TX 1 of 5Oak View Health And RehabilitationConway, SC 1 of 5Oakwood Care And RehabilitationLakewood, CO 1 of 5Omaha Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterOmaha, NE 1 of 5Onion Creek Nursing and Rehabilitation CenterAustin, TX 1 of 5Park Manor Bee CaveBee Cave, TX 1 of 5Pelican Pointe Health And Rehabilitation CenterWindsor, CO 1 of 5Premier Care Center For Palm SpringsPalm Springs, CA 1 of 5Provo Rehabilitation and NursingProvo, UT 1 of 5Rock Canyon Respiratory And Rehabilitation CenterPueblo, CO 1 of 5Rosewood Rehabilitation CenterReno, NV 1 of 5San Marcos Rehabilitation and Healthcare CenterSan Marcos, TX 1 of 5Sonterra Health CenterSan Antonio, TX 1 of 5SouthlandNorwalk, CA 1 of 5Southland Rehabilitation And Healthcare CenterLufkin, TX 1 of 5Spencer Post Acute Rehabilitation CenterSpencer, IA

Showing 40 of 341; lowest-rated first.

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
EASTLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL DISTRICTOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 04/01/2017
HARRIS, MARTINIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2017
SHANE, JAMESIndividualMANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/02/2024
BURNAM, SOONIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 04/01/2017
KEETCH, CHADIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 03/01/2011
TAYLOR, STEPHENIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 07/01/2025
WELLINGTON HEALTHCARE, INC.OrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/01/2017
CARETRUST GP LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/1999
CARETRUST REIT INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/1999
CTR PARTNERSHIP LPOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/1999
ENSIGN SERVICES INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2002
TEMPLE HEALTH HOLDINGS LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 09/01/1999

CMS files one row per role, so the 17 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

7 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.

$6.4M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+4.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$642K
Related-party expense10% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 42%Medicare 4%Other / private 55%

This home reported $642K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 10% 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.

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

$320per resident / day
operating cost
$9,731per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$334per 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 455637. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-06-05, 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