Wesley Woods Health & Rehabilitation
1700 Woodgate Drive, Waco, TX 76712 · For profit - Corporation · 120 certified beds · (254) 666-5454 Medicare & Medicaid certified
This home has serious findings on its record. Read them closely before you consider it.
- it has an abuse, neglect, or exploitation citation (F0600), cited Jun 2024
- inspectors cited 1 immediate-jeopardy problem — the most serious level
- 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
- the CMS record shows $55,900 in federal fines (most recent 2025-03-19)
- its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
- its payroll-based staffing rating is low (2/5)
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (2/5)
- nursing-staff turnover (56%) 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 | 2 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 2 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 2 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 | 2 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 2 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 1 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 improved from 1 to 2 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 | 18.1% | 15.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.7% | 3.0% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.2% | 0.3% | 0.9% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.0% | 0.8% | 2.0% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 1.1% | 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 | 4.1% | 3.3% | 3.3% | worse |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 21.7% | 14.0% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 25.4% | 18.0% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 92.6% | 98.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 5.1% | 3.8% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 21.4% | 13.4% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 26.7% | 9.6% | 17.1% | worse |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 1.4% | 1.5% | 1.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 80.5% | 88.0% | 79.4% | typical |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 30.4% | 25.7% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 47.8% | 12.3% | 12.0% | check this† — see note marked dagger below the table |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 2.26 | 2.17 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 3.39 | 2.06 | 1.80 | worse |
† This value is several times the typical-state benchmark. It can be real, or it can be a coding artifact in what the facility submitted. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
‡ 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.
49.2% 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 58 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 9.5% 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 21 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 1.24 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 98% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% 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 | 49.2%CMS range 40.9–60.8 | 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 | 10.6%CMS range 7.2–16.1 | 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 | 9.5% | 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 | 23.8% | 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 | 14.3% | 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 | 90.0% | 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 | not 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 discharge | not 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 stay | 6.7% | 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 | 0.0% | 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 | 6.4%CMS range 3.6–12.6 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.29 | 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 120 beds and averages 110.2 residents a day — about 92% occupied, or roughly 10 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 3.51 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.25 is below the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.29 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.25 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.61 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.15 to 0.48 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 56% 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
Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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 13 most serious are shown; the remaining 13 are one tap away and print in full.
- Immediate jeopardy · Kcited before2025-04-08 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain accurate and timely medication records to minimize the potential for medication related adverse consequences or events for three (Resident #1, Resident #2 and Resident #3) of five residents reviewed for med errors. A medication error occurred on 11/28/2024 where residents # 1, #2 and #3 all received a double dose of their scheduled narcotic pain medication. Residents #1, #2 and #3 received their first dose at 7pm and the second dose at 8:30 pm. The nursing facility failed to: o follow their policy for medication administration to avoid errors. o document and monitor Residents #1, #2, and #3 after the medication errors to ensure no adverse effects o notify the Responsible Parties of Residents #1, #2, and #3 after medication errors An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified on 04/4/2025 at 5:50 pm and the facility was notified and given an IJ template. A revised template was provided on 4/7/2025 at 2:05 pm. While the IJ was removed on 04/8/2025…
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.
- Actual harm · G2024-06-13 · tag F0600 — failed to protect residents from abuse and neglect — isolatedProtect 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 interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents had the right to be free from abuse for one (Resident #1) out of seven reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to prevent abuse by failing to ensure Resident #1 was not pushed by CNA A resulting in a fall in his room on 5/27/2024. This failure placed residents at risk for abuse with potential for injuries, pain, trauma, and hospitalization. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 6/12/2024 reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: Osteoarthritis left knee (arthritis of the knee), Alzheimer's Disease (progressive brain disorder that destroys memory and thinking skills), Age-related Macular Degeneration (degenerative condition of the eye affecting sight), Psychophysical visual disturbances (auditory/visual hallucinations/delusions), Hearing loss, Hypertension (high blood pressure), and Cerebrovascular Disease (problem with blood flow in the brain). Review of Resident #1's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · Gcited before2023-08-02 · 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 respect the residents' right for 3 (Resident #1, Resident #27, and Resident #42) of 3 residents to send and promptly receive unopened mail, letters, and packages each postal delivery day. The facility failed to ensure Residents #1, #27, and #42 had the right to receive unopened packages. The failure could affect the rights of the facility's residents by opening their packages. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 08/02/2023 revealed a [AGE] year-old-female with an admission date of 02/02/2019. Diagnoses included unspecified dementia, unspecified severity, without behavioral disturbance, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance, and anxiety, bipolar disorder, unspecified, and personal history of malignant neoplasm of brain (a fast-growing cancer that spreads to other areas of the brain and spine). Review of Resident #1's most recent MDS assessment dated [DATE] revealed Resident #1 had a BIMS score of 14 suggesting…
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 · Fcited before2026-03-19 · 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for one of one kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation The facility failed to label, date, and seal food items in the pantry, refrigerator, and chest freezer on 3/19/2026. This failure could place residents at risk for health complications and foodborne illnesses.Findings included: During an observation on 3/19/2026, between 10:29 a.m. and 10:47 a.m., the following observations were made in the kitchen area: 1) an opened bag of cocoa was sitting on the pantry shelf with the top of the bag rolled down.2) an opened bag of cake mix was in a zip bag, but not labeled or dated on the pantry shelf3) an opened bag of lettuce mix was not sealed, labeled or dated on the fridge shelf4) a plastic container of a jello and fruitlike substance was not labeled or dated on the fridge shelf5) a metal container of cooked eggs was not labeled or dated on the fridge shelf6) a metal container of cooked breakfast meat was not labeled or dated 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 · E2025-12-31 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — patternEnsure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide each resident with a nourishing, attractive, palatable, temperature appropriate diet that met his or her dietary needs or preferences for 5 (Resident #13, #37, #53, #58, and #79) of 13 residents reviewed for dietary services.1. The facility failed to serve food that was appetizing.2. The facility failed to ensure food was served according to expected food temperatures.3. The facility failed to serve food that was adequately cooked in that residents were served raw and/or undercooked chicken, ground meat, and potatoes These failures placed residents at risk of decreased food intake, hunger, unwanted weight loss, and diminished quality of life. Findings include:Record review of Resident #13's face sheet on 12/31/2025 reflected an [AGE] year-old female with an original admission date of 4/8/2025 and readmission on [DATE] with diagnoses including Enterocolitis (inflammation in the inner lining of the small intestine and colon) from…
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 before2025-12-31 · 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to store food, serve food at the correct temperatures, and sanitize equipment correctly in accordance with professional standards for foodservice safety in the reviewed 1 of 1 kitchen. The findings included:- Food items were not labeled and/or dated. - Food items were out of date. - Food items were not correctly sealed. - Dirty kitchen equipment. - Staff food items were kept with residents' food items. The failures could cause foodborne illness, particularly among vulnerable populations.Findings include:Observation on 12/29/2025 at 9:15 AM of the walk-in cooler reflected the following:- Heavy cream was in the original container, with an expiration date of 12-10-2025.- A plastic bucket of pickled eggs was uncovered and exposed.- A plastic bucket of pickles was uncovered and exposed.- Celery in a container with plastic wrap dated 12-23 with no expiration date. - A bag of greens was left open and exposed. - A box containing green squash had a moldlike substance on one of the squashes. - A package of strawberries…
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 before2025-12-31 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolatedProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored properly for 1of 2 Medication Storage rooms (Hall 300 Room) reviewed for drug storage. The facility failed to ensure expired medications were removed from the medication storage room on Hall 300 and that used dressings that were no longer sterile were also removed from the room. This failure could place residents at risk of receiving ineffective medication treatments and contaminated wound care that could result in unnecessary infections.Findings include: Observation on 12/30/25 at 2:37 pm of the 300 Hall Medication Storage Room revealed:2 Packages of 4x4 Sterile Wound Dressings opened but still in stock for use.1 Package of 4x4 Sterile Silver Wound Dressing opened but still in stock for use.1 Bottle of Zinc 50 milligram tablets expired 11/30/2025 In an interview on 12/31/25 at 1:31 pm CNA A stated, the policy for expired medications and expired/opened medical supplies was to throw them away. She stated that it was important to discard expired…
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 before2025-12-31 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
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 establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 1 laundry room. The facility failed to ensure laundry staff handled and stored linens in a manner to ensure cleanliness and protect from dust and soil to prevent cross-contamination and the spread of infections. This failure could place residents at risk for development of communicable diseases and infections that could diminish a residents' quality of life. Findings were: Observation on 12/30/2025 at 3:35 pm revealed 1 shelf of clean linen (resident gowns) stored on the dirty side of the laundry room. Resident gowns were folded, stacked neatly and appeared ready for use. The gowns were not covered or protected on the dirty side of the laundry. There was no signage giving directions on the use of the gowns. In an interview with 12/30/2025 at 3:40 pm LA C stated the laundry stored on the shelf…
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 before2025-08-15 · 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
Based on observation, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident has a right to personal privacy and confidentiality of his or her personal and medical records for 1 of 4 computers.On 08/14/2025 LVN A left the facility's computer open and unattended at the nurse's station with residents' personal medical information visible to anyone who passed by. The failure could place residents at risk of having their private information changed, viewed, and not kept secure. Findings include: During an observation on 08/14/2025 at 12:17pm reflected that LVN left her computer unlocked/opened and unsupervised, vaguely visible in an open area for resident and other individuals/guest of the facility passing by the nurse's station. At the time of the observation LVN was passing medication and approximately 35 feet away from the computer at the nurse station. During an interview with LVN A on 08/14/2025 at 12:17pm, the LVN A stated she was told it was ok to leave the computer screen unlocked with the resident's information displayed. The LVN A stated she did not remember…
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 · E2025-06-24 · tag F0809 — failed to serve meals on a reasonable schedule — patternEnsure meals and snacks are served at times in accordance with resident’s needs, preferences, and requests. Suitable and nourishing alternative meals and snacks must be provided for residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal times.
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, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to provide each resident at least three meals daily, at regular times comparable to normal mealtimes in the community or in accordance with resident needs, preferences, requests, and plan of care for three (Resident #1, Resident #3, and Resident #5) of 5 reviewed for timely meals. The facility failed to provide breakfast, lunch, and dinner according to the designated meal service schedules on multiple occasions. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of low blood sugar levels, increased stress levels, slowed metabolism rates, weakened immune systems, malnutrition, weakened hearts, and organ failures. Findings include: Interview on 06/24/2025 at 10:47AM with OMB revealed that lunch had been served late to the residents as late as 2PM while OMB was at the facility. OMB stated late meals had been served to residents more than once in the month of May and June. Observation on 06/24/2025 at 12:11PM revealed that lunch trays had…
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 before2025-06-24 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor 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, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure each resident was treated with respect, dignity, and care for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #2) observed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 was treated with respect and dignity when providing personal care for this resident. This failure could place residents at risk of lowered self-esteem, depression, and frustration. Findings included: Record Review of Resident #2's admission record revealed Resident #2 is an [AGE] year-old woman. Resident #2 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease (a progressive brain disorder that slowly destroys memory and thinking skills, eventually impacting the ability to conduct even the simplest tasks), Depression and Anxiety Disorder. Record Review of Resident #2's care plan revealed. 1. Focus Area dated 07/10/2023, indicating Resident #2 has a history of resisting/refusing care and can become physically and verbally aggressive during 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 · Ecited before2025-05-06 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for three (Resident #1 and Resident #3) of five residents reviewed for pharmaceutical services.On 5/2/2025, two (2) medication cards - one from Resident #1 and one from Resident #3 - were observed with white tape on the reverse side of the card. The tape on the reverse side of the medication card indicated the potential for tampering. Administrative and nursing staff failed to be aware of patch use, failed to verify that the patches used were from the pharmacy, and failed to be trained on the use of patches to include when patches were acceptable for use in the facility policies and procedures.On 4/30/2025 during shift overlap, LVN-A and LVN-B discovered a narcotic count sheet reconciliation error. LVN-A noted on the count sheet the medication…
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 · D2025-03-28 · tag F0552 — isolatedEnsure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
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 had the right to be informed of, and participate in, his or her treatment including the right to be informed in advance, by the physician or other practitioner or professional, of the risks and benefits of proposed care and treatment and treatment alternatives or treatment options and to choose the alternative or option he or she preferred for one of nine residents (Resident #1) reviewed for resident rights . The facility failed to notify Resident #1's responsible party when his labs result on 2/25/2025 indicated his lithium levels were out of range. This failure could place residents at risk of a lack of a dignified existence, self-determination and quality of life. Findings include: Record review of Resident # 1's face sheet, dated 3/28/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included: Traumatic Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (Brain bleed), Type 2 Diabetes (a blood…
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 13 citations
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-03-19 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolatedHonor 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 treat each resident with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for one (Resident #1) of six residents reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure CNA C treated Resident #1 with dignity while in his room prior to providing care on 09/25/24 as she was observed talking about non-sensical information. This failure could place residents at risk of intimidation, psychosocial harm, and a decreased quality of life. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's undated face sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's Disease (a brain disorder that slowly destroys memory), cognitive communication deficit disorder (a brain injury that affects a person's ability to communicate effectively), and ADL self-care performance deficit. Review of Resident #1's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-03-19 · 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 the residents environment remained as free of accident hazards as is possible and ensure each resident received adequate supervision for one (Resident #1) of six residents reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility failed to ensure CNA B and CNA C appropriately utilized the mechanical lift on 9/25/24 while transferring Resident #1 to his bed causing him to hit his head on the wall. This failure could place residents at risk of harm, injury, and hospitalization. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's undated face sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old male who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including Alzheimer's Disease (a brain disorder that slowly destroys memory), cognitive communication deficit disorder (a brain injury that affects a person's ability to communicate effectively), and ADL self-care performance deficit. Review of Resident #1's quarterly MDS assessment, dated 9/24/2024, a BIMS was not…
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 before2025-03-19 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolatedProcure 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, and distribute food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in one of one kitchen reviewed for kitchen and food sanitation. The facility failed to ensure DA A wore a beard restraint while preparing food for residents. These failures could have placed residents at risk for food contamination and foodborne illness. Findings included: Observation on 3/4/2025 at 12:30 PM of the kitchen revealed DA A was near the serving table and was not wearing a beard guard when near the food. DA A had a visible sideburns, mustache, and beard no more than one half inch in length. Observation on 3/4/2025 at 4:20 PM of the kitchen revealed DA A was in the kitchen and moving about the serving, drink and dessert tables with the beard net pulled down underneath their chin. In an interview on 3/4/2025 at 4:25 PM, DA A stated they were supposed to wear hair and beard nets when in the kitchen. They said it was important to wear hair and beard nets to prevent resident illness. In an interview 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 · D2024-06-13 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolatedProvide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was assessed by RN B for injuries after his fall on 5/27/2024. This failure placed residents at risk for potential injuries, pain, and hospitalization. Findings included: Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 6/12/2024 reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: Osteoarthritis left knee (arthritis of the knee), Alzheimer's Disease (progressive brain disorder that destroys memory and thinking skills), Age -related Macular Degeneration (degenerative condition of the eye affecting sight), Psychophysical visual disturbances (auditory/visual hallucinations/delusions) , Hearing loss, Hypertension (high blood pressure), and Cerebrovascular Disease (problem with blood flow in the brain). Review of Resident #1's…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-05-25 · 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 storage and labeling in that: The facility failed to ensure food and beverages were safely stored, labeled, and dated in the walk in refrigerator and freezer on 05/25/24. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of foodborne illness. The findings included: Observation of the walk in Refrigerator on 5/25/24 at 10:30AM revealed: 1. One plastic container containing pink substance has no name or opened/prepared and used by dates on it. The DA B accompanied the investigator and stated it was slices of ham. 2. One plastic container with chopped mix vegetables has no name or opened/prepared and used by dates on it. 3. One steel tray containing 6 pieces of sandwich without any name and opened/prepared and used by dates on it. The DA B accompanied the investigator and stated she was not sure when it was prepared. 4. One cardboard box containing 6 packets 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.
- Potential for harm · Ecited before2024-05-25 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — patternProvide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of 3 of 5 residents (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3) reviewed for medication administration, in that: LVN A failed to document the medications administered to Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3, in the MAR. This deficient practice could place residents at-risk of Medication Administration Errors that leads to the danger of overdosing drugs. The findings included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 05/25/24, revealed the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: Alzheimer's disease, , Hypertension, Dysphagia (difficult to swallow), Encounter for palliative care, Psychotic disorder with delusions due to known physiological condition, Insomnia, Anxiety Disorder 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 · E2024-01-22 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — patternSafeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that medical records were accurately documented for three(Resident #1, Resident #3, and Resident #7) of seven residents reviewed for accurate medical records, in that: The facility failed to ensure Residents #1, #3 and #7 had catheter care performed per physicians' orders on 1/6/24, 1/7/24, 1/8/24 and 1/12/24. This failure could place residents with indwelling urinary catheters at risk of sepsis, skin breakdown, urinary tract infections, and pain. Findings included : Review of Resident #1's face sheet dated 1/22/2024 reflected a [AGE] year-old male admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Cervical Disc Disorder (spinal disorder), retention of urine, cardiac pacemaker, Type 2 Diabetes (blood sugar disorder), Hypertension (high blood pressure), and Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (enlargement of the prostate gland). Review of Resident #1's MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected a BIMS of 14 suggesting Resident #1 was cognitively intact. Section…
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 · Fcited before2023-08-02 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespreadProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for all residents The facility failed to establish and implement a water management program as part of the infection control program. This failure had the potential to affect all residents in the facility by placing them at risk of contracting, spreading, and/or exposing them to bacterial or viral infections that could lead to the spread of communicable diseases. Findings included: During an interview with The Administrator at 08/02/24 at 10:30 AM, it was revealed that to her knowledge The Facility water has never been tested for legionella. She then called the cooperate office to confirm the lack of water testing. The Administrator stated there was not a policy on legionella testing or waterborne pathogens testing process. The Administrator reports that cooperate office had ordered a testing kit, but it has not been delivered and she…
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 · E2023-08-02 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — patternProvide 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 unable to conduct activities of daily living (ADLs) received the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for four of 10 residents (Resident #23, Resident #68, Resident #16, and Resident #57) reviewed for quality of life. The facility failed to ensure Resident # 23's, Resident #68's, Resident # 16's, and Resident #57's fingernails were trimmed and cleaned. These failures could place residents at risk for poor hygiene, dignity issues and decreased quality of life. Findings included: 1. Record review of Resident #23's face sheet, dated 08/02/2023, reflected an 84 -year-old male admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Alzheimer's disease (a brain disorder that slowly destroys memory, and thinking skills and, eventually, the ability to carry out the simplest task), muscle wasting and atrophy (loss or decrease of muscle mass), lack of coordination (uncoordinated movement), 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 · E2023-08-02 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — patternProvide 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 observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that residents who needed respiratory care were provided with such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for 3 (Resident #20, Resident #5, and Resident #22) of 3 residents reviewed for respiratory care, in that: The facility failed to: A.) Change and date the nebulizer mask and oxygen humidifier for Resident #20 B.) Change oxygen tubing and date humidifier for Resident #5 and Resident #22 These deficient practices could place residents that receive oxygen therapy at risk for inadequate care and respiratory infection. Findings Included: Resident#20 Record review of Resident #20's face sheet dated August 2,2023 revealed the resident was an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. Her diagnoses were Chronic Kidney Disease (a condition in which the kidneys are damaged and cannot filter blood as well as they should), Nontraumatic Subdural Hemorrhage (a bleeding in the space surrounding the brain), Spinal Stenosis…
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 · F2022-06-23 · tag F0908 — failed to keep essential equipment working — widespreadKeep all essential equipment working safely.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain all mechanical, electrical, and patient care equipment in safe operating condition for 1 of 2 cold storage units in the kitchen. One of the facility walk-in freezers was operating without a heat strip around the door or a flap curtain between the door and cold storage. This condition caused the freezer to form a sheet of ice on the floor and on boxes on the lower two storage shelves. This failure could place residents at risk for not having access to safe frozen foods or pose a delay in receiving meals should the unit become inoperable. Findings included: During an initial tour of the kitchen facilities on 6/21/22 at 9:30 a.m., it was revealed to the Surveyor that the walk-in freezer was icing over around the door, causing a sheet of ice to form on the floor and on boxes on the lower two shelves. The ice on the floor is approximately 1 inch thick and creates a slick surface at the entry to the freezer. The ice covers the length of the doorway and protrudes beyond the threshold on the left side of the entrance. Boxes…
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 before2022-06-23 · 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 respect the resident's right to personal privacy during care, for two of two residents reviewed for medication administration. (Residents #21 and #3) 1. MA 1 did not provide complete privacy when providing Residents #21 and # 3 their medications or while obtaining Resident # 21's blood pressure. This failure could place residents at risk for embarrassment, poor self-esteem, choking, weight loss, and unmet needs. Findings included: Review of Resident #21's face sheet reflected an [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 08/17/2021. Resident #21's diagnoses included Cerebral Infarction (pathologic process that results in an area of necrotic tissue in the brain), Hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body), Mixed Receptive-Expressive Language Disorder (communication disorder in which both receptive and expressive areas of communication may be affected in any degree), Dysphagia (difficulty in swallowing), and Muscle Weakness which…
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 before2022-06-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
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 maintain an infection and prevention control program that included, at a minimum, a system for preventing and controlling infection for 3 of 6 residents reviewed for infection control during medication administration. (Residents #46, #50, and #76) MA 2 failed to perform hand hygiene during medication administration between Residents #76, #50, and #46. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of transmission and/or spread of infection. Findings include: Observation on 06/22/22 at 1:10 PM revealed MA 2 assisted Resident #25 in providing tissue to clean resident's dirty hand. MA 2 then proceeded to push the med cart to Resident #76's room. Without performing hand hygiene, MA 2 started to prepare medication for Resident #76's room. MA 2 with non-gloved hands opened a capsule and poured the powder into the med cup and mixed it with vanilla pudding. Without performing hand hygiene, MA 2 administered the medication to Resident #76. MA 2 returned to the med cart and without performing hand hygiene started…
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
$55,900 in federal fines across 1 penalty. 1 Medicare payment denial on record.
- $55,900 — penalty dated 2025-03-19
- Medicare payment denial — starting 2025-05-08 for 8 days
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 CORYELL COUNTY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL AUTHORITY — 9 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 | 2.8 | -0.8 vs chain |
| Health inspection | 2 of 5 | 2.9 | -0.9 vs chain |
| Staffing | 2 of 5 | 2.1 | -0.1 vs chain |
| Quality measures | 2 of 5 | 3.4 | -1.4 vs chain |
The other 8 homes this chain runs (chain average 2.8★, per CMS)
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| BYROM, DAVID | Individual | MANAGING CONTROL - GOVERNING BODY; CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 04/01/2017 |
| CORYELL COUNTY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL AUTHORITY | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2018 |
| WOODGATE SENIOR CARE LLC | Organization | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/07/2025 |
| COOK, CATHERINE | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | since 12/01/2018 |
| COOK, JACK | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 12/01/2018 |
| FLOWERS, ADAM | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/01/2023 |
| THOMASSON, DEBRA | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 04/01/2023 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 7 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
2 organizational owners listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
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 676211. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-12-31, 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.