Amistad Nursing and Rehabilitation Center
200 Riverside Drive, Uvalde, TX 78801 · Government - Hospital district · 200 certified beds · (830) 278-5641 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (26) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (1/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (97%) 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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 3 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 1 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 5 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 2 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 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 7.4% | 15.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 3.7% | 3.0% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.3% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.7% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.7% | 2.4% | 6.5% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 5.2% | 3.3% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 8.9% | 14.0% | 16.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 6.4% | 18.0% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.0% | 3.8% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 19.4% | 13.4% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 1.7% | 9.6% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 88.0% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 27.6% | 25.7% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 23.1% | 12.3% | 12.0% | worse |
‡ 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.
54.1% 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 78 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 54.4% 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 46 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 0.35 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 59% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 5% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 54.1%CMS range 44.8–64.9 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 15.1%CMS range 10.6–19.8 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 54.4% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 60.9% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 47.8% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 1.4% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 6.8% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 8.0%CMS range 5.0–13.4 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.13 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 200 beds and averages 90.6 residents a day — about 45% occupied, or roughly 109 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 2.77 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.29 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 1.40 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 2.34 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 2.95 on weekdays — 21% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.33 to 0.20 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 97% is well above the national median of 45%. 2 administrators have left in the past year — frequent leadership churn is a warning sign families often miss.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
26 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 16 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2026-06-26 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety, for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for food safety. Raisin bread and hamburger buns were stored in the facility's' kitchen pantry without labeled dates to indicate when the food was received and opened.Hamburger buns were stored in the facility's' kitchen pantry unsealed and open to air.The facility's' nutrition room refrigerator had resident foods which were not labeled to indicate when the food was received or when the food should be discarded.Food delivered by the food vendor was stored in cardboard cases upon the floor. These failures could place residents at risk for food borne illness.The findings included: During an observation and interview on 6/23/2026 at 11:00 AM revealed the facility's kitchen pantry stored 5 loaves of Raisin bread, packaged in the manufacturer's clear plastic wrap upon a wire rack. The loaves were all without any labeled date to indicate when the bread was received. A package…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2026-06-26 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor 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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided a sanitary and comfortable environment for 1 of 3 shower areas (400-hall shower) reviewed for physical environment. The facility failed to ensure the 400-hall shower area was free from dirt and debris. This failure could result in decreased quality of life. Findings included: In an interview with a confidential resident on an undisclosed date/time, the resident said the shower room in the 400-hall was dirty, and the lack of cleanliness made the resident feel uncomfortable when bathing. In an observation on 6/23/2026 at 2:26 PM, the 400-hall shower was observed to have a wet, black substance between the tiles on the floor. The moveable shower chair had a similar, wet, black substance on the surface of the bottom panel and the fabric straps. In a second observation on 6/24/2026 at 10:45 AM, revealed the condition of the 400-hall shower area was unchanged. In an interview on 6/24/2026 at 10:45 AM, the HSKD said the shower areas were cleaned daily, and the shower chairs were deep…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-26 · tag F0585 — failed to handle grievances — patternHonor the resident's right to voice grievances without discrimination or reprisal and the facility must establish a grievance policy and make prompt efforts to resolve grievances.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to voice grievances to the facility or other agency or entity that hears grievances without discrimination or reprisal and without fear of discrimination or reprisal. These grievances included those with respect to care and treatment which had been furnished as well as those which had not been furnished, the behavior of staff and of other residents, and other concerns regarding their long term care (LTC) facility stay, for 3 of 8 residents (Residents #11, #12, and #30) reviewed for grievances. CNA A failed to file a grievance when Resident #11 reported to CNA G that someone stole $31 from her some days prior to 6/24/2026.The facility failed to take immediate action, per their grievance policy, to prevent further potential violations of any resident right while the alleged violations were being investigated when Resident #30's representative complained that LVN D was verbally abusive and neglectful. LVN D…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-26 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — patternTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, were reported immediately, but not later than 2 hours after the allegation is made, if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury, to the administrator of the facility and to other officials (including to the State Survey Agency and adult protective services where state law provides for jurisdiction in long-term care facilities) in accordance with State law through established procedures, for 3 of 8 residents (Residents #11, #12, and #30) reviewed for reporting suspicions of abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment CNA G failed to report an allegation of misappropriation of property to the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-26 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — patternRespond 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to report the results of all investigations to the administrator or his or her designated representative and to other officials in accordance with State law, including to the State Survey Agency, within 5 working days of the incident, and if the alleged violation were verified appropriate corrective actions must have been taken, for 3 of 8 residents (Residents #11, #12, and #30) reviewed for reporting suspicions of abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment. The facility failed to investigate and provide the State Agency with a report no later than 5 days after the alleged abuse, neglect, exploitation, mistreatment, and misappropriation of property was received for:A reported allegation of misappropriation of property, when Resident #11 reported to CNA G that someone stole $31 from her.A reported allegation of verbal Abuse and neglect when Resident #30 and her Representative alleged LVN D had neglected to administer medications and was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-26 · tag F0635 — patternProvide doctor's orders for the resident's immediate care at the time the resident was admitted.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure at the time each resident was admitted , the facility had physician orders for the resident's immediate care, for 1 of 8 residents reviewed (Resident #30) for medications needed upon admission. Resident #30 was discharged from the hospital and admitted to the facility on [DATE] with an immediate need for anticoagulant medication which was not prescribed per the physicians' and manufactures' recommendations and resulted in Resident #30 missing 4 doses. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving medications upon admission.The findings included: A record review of Resident #30's admission record dated 6/26/2026 revealed an admission date of 6/2/2026. Resident #30 had diagnoses which included emphysema (a progressive, irreversible lung disease where the tiny air sacs are gradually destroyed), cerebral infarction (stroke; a medical emergency that occurs when blood flow to an area of the brain is cut off or a blood vessel 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.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-26 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — patternProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 3 of 5 residents (Residents #5, #76, and #77) reviewed for transmission-based precautions. The facility failed to ensure staff wore required PPE when providing assistance for Residents #76 and #77. The facility failed to ensure staff performed proper hand-hygiene when providing personal care for Resident #5. This failure could lead to the spread of infection. Findings included: 1.Record review of Resident #76's admission Record dated 6/24/2026 reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included other diseases of stomach and duodenum [digestive tract]. Record review of Resident #76's Order Summary Report dated 6/24/2026 reflected the following physician's order dated 4/17/2026:Currently on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2026-06-26 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — patternKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain all mechanical, electrical, and patient care equipment in safe operating condition, for 1 of 1 facility kitchen reviewed for essential equipment. The facility's 1 of 1 dishwashing machine had a faulty temperature gauge which indicated safe operating temperatures.The facility's 1 of 1 plate warmer was malfunctioning and not operational for longer than a week. This failure could place residents at risk for food borne illness and cold food.The findings included: During an observation and interview on 6/23/2026 at 11:00 AM, revealed the kitchen's 1 of 1 electrical plate warmer was plugged into the electrical outlet but had room temperature plates stored within. DA H and [NAME] G stated the plate warmer was malfunctioning and had not warmed plates since last week or maybe prior. The FSM stated that the plate warmer had been documented in the facility's maintenance care program which alerted the Maintenance Director to the needed repair. During an observation and interview on 6/24/2026 at 11:37 AM,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-26 · tag F0557 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to be treated with respect and dignity and to retain and use personal possessions.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident has a right to be treated with respect and dignity for 1 of 8 (Resident #51) residents reviewed for personal hygiene in that: Resident #51 had long strands of facial hair on upper lip and chin area, and she did wanted them shaved. This failure could affect all residents that did not want facial hair and could result in low self-esteem. The Findings: Record review of Resident #51's admission Record dated June 25, 2026, documented she was admitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses included Parkinson's disease, muscle weakness, lack of coordination, dementia and anxiety. Record review of Resident #51's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] documented she was usually able to make self- understood, she usually understands others and had a BIMs score of 9/15 (meant she was moderately cognitively impaired). She had impairment on one side to her upper extremity, she scored 8/8 for personal hygiene (meant not attempted due to medical condition…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-26 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 4 of 8 (Residents #10, #51, #62, #75) residents reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #10's care plan had discharge plans.The facility failed to ensure Resident #51's care plan had discharge plans.The facility failed to ensure Resident #62's care plan had discharge planThe facility failed to ensure Resident #75's care plan had discharge plans.This could affect residents and could result in residents not being educated on indwelling catheter positioning and residents not having a discharge plan or goal to set. The Findings: 1.Record review of Resident #10's admission Record dated 6/26/2026 revealed the resident was admitted on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 16 citations
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-26 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolatedProvide 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living receives the necessary services to maintain grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 1 of 8 (Resident #51) residents reviewed for personal hygiene in that: 1.Resident #51 had long strands of facial hair on upper lip and chin area, that she wanted staff to shave her.2. Resident #51 had not cleaned her teeth in the last 3 days of surveyor observations. This failure could affect all residents that did not want facial hair, wanted to have clean teeth and could result in low self-esteem. The Findings:Record review of Resident #51's admission Record dated June 25, 2026, documented she was admitted on [DATE]. Resident #51 had diagnoses of Parkinson's disease, (a progressive neurodegenerative disorder characterized by tremors, muscular rigidity, postural instability, and loss of dopamine-producing neurons in the substantia nigra, often with Lewy bodies present 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-06-26 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure drugs used in the facility were labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for 1 of 4 medication carts (E-Hall medication cart) reviewed for medication storage. The facility failed to ensure 2 insulin pens in the E-Hall medication cart were labeled with the date opened. This failure could result in residents receiving expired insulin, leading to uncontrolled blood sugar levels. Findings included:In an observation and interview on [DATE] at 10:01 AM, 2 insulin pens were observed in the E-Hall medication cart without dates indicating when they were opened. MA A said she thought the pens were removed from the refrigerator storage by the overnight nurse because all of the pens were dated when she worked the day prior. She said the facility policy was to date all insulins at the time they are removed from the fridge, and the potential harm was not knowing if the insulin is expired. In an interview with the DON…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-26 · tag F0808 — failed to follow doctor-ordered diets — isolatedEnsure 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews of the facility failed to ensure therapeutic diets must be prescribed by the attending physician for 1 resident of 1 (Resident #62) in that: Resident #62 did not have her ice cream cup with her meal tray. This could affect all residents that get a meal tray and could cause residents to lose weight. The Findings: Record review of Resident #62's admission Record dated 6/25/2026 revealed she was admitted on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE]. Resident #62 had medical diagnoses of muscle wasting, dementia, diabetes II, and chronic kidney disease. Record review of Resident #62's Comprehensive MDS dated [DATE] revealed her BIMS score was 7/15 (severe cognitive impairment), and she required supervision or touching assistance with eating; and had no weight loss. Record review of Resident #62's consolidated orders for June 2026 revealed she had a regular diet with mechanical soft, ground texture, and ice cream for lunch and dinner. Record review of Resident #62's Care…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-06-26 · tag F0919 — failed to provide a working call system — isolatedMake sure that a working call system is available in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the facility must be adequately equipped to allow residents to call for staff assistance through a communication system which relays the call directly to a staff member or to a centralized staff work area from Each resident's bedside for 1 of 8 (#51) resident with call system in that: Resident #51's call light was not working when she was lying in bed. This failure could affect all residents with call lights at bedside and could result in call light not being answered and causing further harm. The Findings: Record review of Resident #51's admission Record dated 06/25/2026 revealed she was admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses of Parkinson's disease, muscle weakness, lack of coordination, dementia and anxiety. Record review of Resident #51's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed she was usually able to make herself- understood, she usually understood others and her BIMs score was 9/15 (meant she was moderately cognitively impaired).…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-04-09 · tag F0850 — failed to provide social-work services — patternHire a qualified full-time social worker in a facility with more than 120 beds.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interviews and record review, the facility with more than 120 beds failed to employ a qualified social worker on a full-time basis, for 1 of 1 social services staff reviewed for qualifications of Social Worker. The facility, licensed for 200 beds, did not employ a full-time social worker. This failure could place residents at risk of social service and psychosocial needs not being met. The findings included: Record review of the facility's Daily Census Report, dated 4/6/25, noted the facility had a total licensed bed capacity of 200. Record review of the Facility Summary Report from the Texas Unified Licensure Information Portal (TULIP) noted the facility had a total licensed capacity of 200 beds. Record review of the facility's Contract Binder, showed no contract with a licensed social worker. During an interview on 4/6/25 at 1:14 PM, the DON stated the facility did not have a social worker and had not had a social worker for a while. During an interview on 04/08/25 at 03:53 PM, the Acting Administrator stated it was very difficult to find a social worker in this area, and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-09 · tag F0576 — isolatedEnsure residents have reasonable access to and privacy in their use of communication methods.
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 had the right to send and receive mail, and to receive letters, package and other materials delivered to the facility or the resident through a means other than a postal service, including the right to privacy of such communications for 1 of 5 residents (confidential resident) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure staff distributed mail received on Saturdays to the residents. This deficient practice could result in residents not receiving mail in a timely manner and a diminished quality of life. The findings were: During a confidential resident group meeting 1 of 5 members group stated they never received mail on Saturdays because the Front Office Staff didn't work on Saturdays. During an interview on 4/7/25 at 3:16 p.m., the Receptionist stated she worked for the facility for almost 3 years and usually worked from Monday to Friday and sometimes on the weekends. The Receptionist stated she delivered personal mail to the residents daily from Monday to Friday. The Receptionist stated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-09 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had a right to personal privacy and confidentiality in his or her personal and medical records for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #52) reviewed for residents' rights. The facility failed to ensure LVN D locked the medication cart computer screen and left Resident #52's information exposed. This failure could place residents at risk of resident-identifiable information being accessed by unauthorized persons. The findings included: Record review of Resident #52's face sheet, dated 4/8/25, revealed an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE]. Resident #52 had diagnoses which included cerebral infarction (type of stroke that occurs when blood flow to a part of the brain is blocked or significantly reduced, leading to tissue death), dementia (a decline in cognitive function that is severe enough to interfere with a person's daily life and activities), dysphagia (language disorder…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-04-09 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolatedProvide 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 a resident who was incontinent of bladder receives appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections and to restore continence to the extent possible for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #68 and #40) reviewed for indwelling urinary catheter care/incontinence care: 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #68's indwelling urinary catheter drainage bag was not touching the floor and failed to provide proper incontinence care. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #40's indwelling urinary catheter drainage bag was not touching the floor. This failure could place residents with indwelling urinary catheter devices at risk for the development of new or worsening urinary tract infections. The findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #68's face sheet dated 4/7/25 revealed a [AGE] year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included acute kidney failure (sudden…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-04-09 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for one of six medication carts (200 hall nurse cart) assessed for medication storage and labeling. The facility failed to ensure all medications located inside the 200 hall nurse cart were stored in labeled containers. This failure could place residents at risk of receiving inadequate treatments or ingesting medications for which they were not prescribed. The findings included: During an observation on 04/08/25 at 9:25 AM of the 200 hall nurse cart, five pills were observed lying in the bottom in the cart, not in labeled containers. During an interview on 04/08/25 at 9:25 AM regarding the loose pills in the 200 hall nurse cart, ADON C stated, they could get them confused and give it to a patient who isn't supposed to take them. ADON C stated, when they find loose pills they try to track what they are and then dispose of them. During an interview on 04/09/25 at 08:57 AM regarding the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-02-28 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — patternHonor 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 and interview, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment for daily living for 3 of 6 residents rooms (Resident rooms [ROOM NUMBER]) reviewed for environmental concerns in that: 1. Resident rooms for Residents #39, #52 and #46 had many scratches and removed paint changing the appearance of the door making them look dirty and damaged. 2. Resident #52's room had multiple scratches on the walls. These failures could affect residents who resided at the facility and could put them at risk of living in an unsafe, unclean, and uncomfortable and an un-homelike environment. Findings included: During an observation and interview of Resident #39's room on 02/26/2024 at 1:20 p.m., Resident # 39 stated, have you looked at these door frames, they don't look nice, the paint is coming off, they shouldn't be like that; this place gets paid a lot of money and it should look very good for us. During an observation and interview of Resident #52's room on 02/26/2024 at…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-02-28 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen. 1. There was a box with an opened clear plastic bag containing items identified as frozen fish, by the DM, partially opened exposing the fish to air and possible other contaminants in the freezer. 2. There was a clear large plastic bag of items identified as cut up sausage links, by the DM, with no label or date in the freezer. 3. There was one large plastic bag of a yellow substance identified as a bag of eggs with no label or date in refrigerator A. 4. There was a plastic container identified as a container of chorizo partially used with no opened date in refrigerator B. 5. There was an open bag of an item identified as coffee creamer by the DM opened and not sealed in the dry storage area. These failures could place residents who received meals and/or snacks from the kitchen at risk for food borne illness. The findings included: During an observation and interview with the DM on…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-02-28 · tag F0559 — isolatedHonor the resident's right to share a room with spouse or roommate of choice and receive written notice before a change is made.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure the right to receive written notice of a room change before the change was made for 1 of 1 resident (#46) reviewed for right to receive written notification. The facility did not provide evidence that Resident #46 was given a written notice of a room change before the resident was moved. This deficient practice could affect residents in the facility that are moved without required notification. Record review of Resident #46's face sheet dated 02/27/2024 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included polyosteoarthritis, lack of coordination, difficulty walking, mild cognitive impairment, anxiety disorder, and presence of a cardiac pacemaker. Review of Resident #46's Quarterly MDS dated [DATE] revealed the resident had a BIMS score of 09 which indicated mild cognitive impairment. Interview with Resident #46 on 02/26/2024 at 1:40 p.m., Resident #46 said, I am upset with this place.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-28 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolatedEnsure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles, in 1 of 7 (100 hall medication cart) medication carts observed: The facility failed to assure that 100 hall medication cart was secure and inaccessible to unauthorized staff and residents. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of medication misuse and diversion. The findings were: Observation on 2/25/2024 at 10:02 am, the 100-hall medication cart was not locked as evidenced by the lock not being pushed in to engage the lock. Interview on 2/25/2024 at 10:03 am with LVN A, verified the medication cart was not locked and she proceeded to lock it. Interview on 2/28/2024 at 11:57 am with ADON B, he stated that the medication carts should be locked for safety reasons. He stated unlocked medication carts could place residents at risk of accessing medications or other items in the cart and cause medication misuse or diversion.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-02-28 · tag F0850 — failed to provide social-work services — isolatedHire a qualified full-time social worker in a facility with more than 120 beds.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review and interviews a facility with more than 120 beds, failed to employ a qualified social worker on a full-time basis, for 1 of 1 social services staff reviewed: The facility, licensed for 200 beds, did not employ a full-time social worker. This failure could place residents at risk of social service and psychosocial needs not being met. The findings were: Record review of Facility Summary Report, undated, revealed the facility had a total licensed capacity for 200 beds. During a review of staff training and licensure on 02/28/24 at 11:30 am, the HR Director revealed the social worker did not have a current license since she was still in school. The HR Director stated the social worker will graduate in May and will then test for her LBSW license. During an interview with ADM and ADO on 02/28/24 at 1:19 pm, the ADM stated they hired the social services director (SSD) last October on 10-23-23 knowing she was still in school for social work. She would graduate in May with her LBSW and she may test just prior to her graduation date. The ADM stated they did have 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-01-19 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents. The facility failed to safely provide ADLs including bed mobility for Resident #1 and prevent injury during incontinent care or dressing the resident. This failure could place ADL dependent resident at risk for accidents, injuries, and hospitalization. Findings included: Record review of Resident #1's, dated 01/19/2024, face sheet revealed the resident was an [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE], re-admitted on [DATE] and date of discharge was 08/11/23. Her diagnoses included Parkinson's disease (is a progressive disorder that affects the nervous system and the parts of the body controlled by the nerves), contracture of the right hand and left hand (A permanent tightening of the muscles, tendons, skin, and surrounding tissues that causes the joints to shorten 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.
- No harm found · C2025-04-09 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — widespreadReasonably 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 and safety of the resident or others for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for call light placement. The facility failed to ensure the call light was within reach for Resident #4. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of not receiving help as needed. The findings were: Record review of Resident #4's face sheet, dated 04/07/2025, revealed a female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and re-admitted on [DATE]. Resident #4 had diagnoses which included: polyosteoarthritis (arthritis affecting multiple joints), dementia (syndrome that progressively affects a persons cognitive ability) and muscle weakness. Record review of Resident #4's MDS assessment, dated 03/11/2025, revealed the resident's BIMS score was 3, which indicated…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Part of a chain
This home belongs to CREATIVE SOLUTIONS IN HEALTHCARE — 149 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →
| Rating | This home | Chain avg | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2 of 5 | 2.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 3 of 5 | 2.7 | +0.3 vs chain |
| Staffing | 1 of 5 | 1.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 3 of 5 | 3.2 | -0.2 vs chain |
The other 148 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.1★, per CMS)
Showing 40 of 148; lowest-rated first.
A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| BOWERS, SEAN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 01/01/2024 |
| CISNEROS, ALFRED | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 02/18/2008 |
| COBB, TRAVIS | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 10/05/2022 |
| COOPER, STEPHEN | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 11/11/2022 |
| HARDIN, SHERRIE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 09/04/2024 |
| KERZEE, RICHARD | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 09/24/2007 |
| KORENEK, PATRICIA | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 05/05/2018 |
| SOECHTING, PAUL | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 11/22/2024 |
| STRACK, JOE | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY | since 02/11/2022 |
| HUGGINS, LINDA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 09/01/2022 |
| WILLIG, ZACHARY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 01/01/2025 |
| THOMPSON, JOHNNY | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 01/01/2024 |
| UVALDE I ENTERPRISES LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/09/2025 |
| BLAKE, GARY | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 09/01/2022 |
| BLAKE, MALISA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 09/01/2022 |
| ADAMS, RITA | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/09/2025 |
| CARPINTEYRO, RALPH | Individual | ADP OF THE SNF | since 01/01/2025 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 19 rows in the source record cover these 17 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
1 organizational owner 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.
About 75% 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.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in TX
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Texas Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 455536. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-06-26, 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.