275 Se John Jones Drive, Burleson, TX 76028 · Johnson County · (817) 730-4603
121 certified beds, about 107 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 2021
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 676496 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on September 11, 2025, inspectors cited 10 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 29 health citations since June 2023, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (2 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $17,804 in the last three years; the largest was $9,381, and the latest is dated September 11, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.36 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.31 of those hours.
63.6% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Advanced Healthcare Solutions, an affiliated group of 28 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 29 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that allegations involving abuse, neglect, and misappropriation of resident property were reported immediately, but no later than 2 hours after the allegation is made to the State Survey Agency for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for injury unknown origin. The facility failed to report within 2 hours to the State Survey Agency (HHSC - Health and Human Services Commission) an injury of unknown origin when CNA A reported to LVN B that Resident #1 had complained of pain while trying to get out of bed on 05/29/2026 and was sent out to the hospital for further evaluation. Upon evaluation the hospital notified the facility that x-rays showed Resident # 1 had a distal femur fracture when the hospital reported to the facility on [DATE]. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range and electrolyte balance, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrated that this was not possible or resident preferences indicated otherwise for 1 (Resident #1) of 6 residents reviewed for nutrition status maintenance. The facility failed to Accurately and consistently assess a resident's weight status on admission and weekly for 4 weeks for Resident #1. These failures could place residents at risk of further weight loss, malnutrition, and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive care plan to meet the residents' highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of 1 (Resident #1) of 6 residents reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to update the comprehensive person-centered care plan for Resident #1's need for oral care and dentures. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving appropriate care and treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who required dialysis received such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for one (Resident #101) of three residents reviewed for Dialysis Care. The facility failed to transport Resident #101 to her dialysis appointment on 09/05/2025 at 6:00am due to not having a driver. On 09/09/2025 at 4:45p.m., an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified. While the IJ was removed on 9/11/2025, the facility remained out of compliance at a severity level of no actual harm with the potential for more than minimal harm and a scope of isolated due to the facility continuing to monitor the implementation and effectiveness of their Plan of Removal. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the facility had sufficient staffing to meet the needs of five Residents (Residents #6, #15, #1, #85 and #97) of 20 residents reviewed for nursing services. The facility failed to ensure that the facility had sufficient staffing to meet the needs of Residents #6, #15, #1, #85 and #97. This failure could affect and diminish the resident's quality of life by potentially placing the residents at risk of not receiving timely care or receiving nursing interventions to meet the resident's needs, risk of injury, risk of safety, and/or it can make the resident feel neglected affecting their mental health and overall psychosocial well-being not being met by facility staff.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to 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 3 of 10 residents (Resident #9, Resident #53, and Resident #101) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure CNA H knocked on Resident #9's and Resident #101's doors before entering the residents' rooms. The facility failed to ensure CNA A closed Resident #53's door during peri-care (cleaning of the private areas). These failures could place residents at risk of feeling like their privacy was invaded or cause psychosocial harm and emotional distress.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to promote the residents' right to receive mail, for all facility residents. The facility failed to ensure staff distributed mail received on Saturdays to the residents. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving mail in a timely manner and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to provide, based on the comprehensive assessment and care plan and the preferences of each resident, an ongoing activities program to support residents in their choice of activities, both facility sponsored group and individual activities, and independent activities, designed to meet the interests of and support the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, encouraging both independence and interaction in the community for three of seven residents ( Resident #85, Resident #1, and Resident #97) reviewed for activities. The facility failed to provide Resident #85 and Resident #1 in room activities since their admission on [DATE] for Resident #85, on 08/07/2025 for Resident #1 and Resident #97 post hospitalization during two weeks of August 8th thru August 22nd, 2025. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to have sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skill sets to provide quality care for 1 of 12 staff reviewed for nursing services. The facility failed to ensure that MA M renewed her certified nurse aide license. This failure could affect and diminish the resident's quality of life by potentially placing the residents at risk of not receiving competent and skilled care to assure resident safety and maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident according to their individual comprehensive care plans.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of significant medications errors for 3 of 15 (Resident #12, Resident #91, and Resident #96) residents reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure MA administered Resident #12's 9:00a.m. scheduled time-sensitive medications until 1.5 - 3 hours after the ordered time on 09/07/2025. The facility failed to ensure MA G administered Resident #91's 9:00a.m. scheduled time-sensitive medications until 1.5 - 3 hours after the ordered time on 09/07/2025. The facility failed to ensure MA L administered Resident #91's 9:00a.m. scheduled time-sensitive medications until 1.5 - 3 hours after the ordered time on 09/11/2025. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food under sanitary conditions for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for food and nutrition services. 1. The facility failed to ensure food items were labeled and dated with the received or expiration date. 2. The facility failed to properly store food in the pantry and freezer. 3. The [NAME] failed to wash her hands and change gloves between puree tasks. These failures could place residents who ate food served by the kitchen at risk of cross contamination and food-borne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a new resident was not admitted with mental illness unless the state mental health authority determined eligibility, based on independent physical and mental evaluation performed by a person or entity other than the State mental health authority, prior to admission for 1 of 12 residents (Resident #66) reviewed for PASRR services. The facility failed to ensure a positive PASRR screening was sent to the mental health authority for Resident #66. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for not obtaining the services needed to treat their mental health diagnoses.
Inspectors wroteBased 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 development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #97) reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure CNA E was following infection control protocol during urinary catheter care and peri-care for Resident #97 by not changing her gloves when cleansing the catheter tubing and doing peri-care on 09/10/25. This failure could place residents at risk of transmission of disease and infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 (Resident #1) of 7 residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's comprehensive MDS assessment dated [DATE] accurately reflected her use of dentures and having no natural teeth. This deficient practice could have placed the resident at risk for inadequate care due to inaccurate assessments.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident care plan accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #1) who were reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to develop a person-centered care plan for Resident #1's oral care needs related to denture use despite a dentists' visit and cleaning of her dentures on 4/21/25. This failure could place residents at risk of their needs going unmet, unintentional weight loss, and/or feelings of self-consciousness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food safety in the facility's only kitchen reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to ensure the griddle was kept clean and free from build-up of grease and food crumbs. This failure could place residents at risk of food borne illnesses and cross contamination.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to 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, recognizing each resident's individuality for two of eight residents (Residents #42 and #32) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure Residents #42 and #32 were kept clean shaven. This failure could place residents at risk of a decreased sense of self-worth.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental, and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to develop a care plan with measurable objectives and timeframes to address Resident #4's catheter. This failure could place residents at risk of receiving inadequate interventions not individualized to their care needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good grooming for two of eight residents (Residents #42 and #32) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure Residents #42 and #32 were kept clean shaven. This failure could place residents at risk of a decreased sense of self-worth.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for one of three residents (Resident #6) reviewed for accidents and hazards. NA B failed to follow policy for transferring residents with mechanical lift devices while transferring Resident #6, resulting in him falling. This failure could place residents at risk for falls and injuries.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needed respiratory care, including tracheostomy care and tracheal suctioning, was provided consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan and the resident's goals and preferences for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #101) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to replace Resident #101's oxygen humidifier bottle when it was empty. This deficient practice could place residents at-risk for respiratory infection, and ineffective treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure, in accordance with State and Federal laws, all drugs and biologicals were stored in locked compartments under proper temperature controls and permitted only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for 1 of 26 residents (Resident #92) reviewed for storage of medication. The facility failed to ensure Resident #92 did not have Dulcolax Docusate Sodium 100 mg/Stool Softener Laxative stool softener stimulant-free stored at the resident's bedside table. This failure could place residents at risk of accessing medications not prescribed to them and overdosing.
Inspectors wroteBased 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 development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of three residents (Residents #43) reviewed for infection control. RN H failed to don a gown before providing bolus feeding to Resident #43, who was on Enhanced Barrier Precautions. This failure could place residents at risk of contracting an infection from residents on Enhanced Barrier Precautions and cross contamination, which could result in infections or illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to establish an antibiotic stewardship program that included antibiotic use protocols and a system to monitor antibiotic use for the facility. The facility failed to have sufficient justification for antibiotic use when Resident #57 was prescribed antibiotic treatment for UTI on 11/11/23 and it was not discontinued. This failure placed the resident at risk for unnecessary antibiotic medication and increased risk of multi-drug resistant organism (MDRO) infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services to include the acquiring and administering of medications to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received his prescribed anti-convulsant medications (medications to prevent seizures) for eight days (16 doses) from 5/17/2024 until 5/25/2024. Resident #1 had a seizure on 5/25/2024 and was sent to the ED for emergent care, returned to the facility on 5/26/2024 and had another seizure on 5/27/2024 and was sent back to the ED. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The IJ began on 5/28/2024 and ended on 5/29/2024. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased 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 for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #2) who were reviewed for accommodation of needs. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2's call light were placed within their reach. This failure could place dependent residents at risk of injuries and unmet needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for residents' rights. The facility failed to keep Resident #1's room free of trash. This failure could lead to residents being harmed due to falls, feeling uncomfortable in their surroundings, or becoming sick due to spread of germs. Findings Included: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to be adequately equipped to allow residents to call for staff assistance through a communication system which relays the call directly to a centralized staff work area, for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for physical environment. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 had a working call light in the room. This failure could place residents at risk of not being able to get assistance when needed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide or obtain radiology services to meet the needs of its residents to include timeliness of the services for two (Resident #70 and Resident #8) of 18 residents reviewed for radiology and diagnostic services. 1. LVN A failed to request x-ray orders to be STAT (referring to a diagnostic or therapeutic procedure that is to be performed immediately; prioritized in a lab, as the results have a potentially immediate impact on patient management) for Resident #70 after reporting pain to her left hand and hip due to a fall on 06/20/23. 2. LVN A failed to obtain and enter x-ray orders for Resident #8 after being informed by Hospice on 06/22/23 regarding Resident #8 complaining of knee pain. These failures placed residents at risk of a delay in treatment.
16 fire safety citations on file: 1 on September 11, 2025, 10 on August 22, 2024, 5 on June 29, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| September 11, 2025 | Fine | $8,423 |
| May 23, 2024 | Fine | $9,381 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Texas | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.36 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.31 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.96 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.13 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.92 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 63.6% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 45.5% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.90 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.52 on weekdays and 2.96 on weekends, 16% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.46 in April to June 2025 to 3.36 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.36 | 0.31 | 3.52 | 2.96 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 107 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.24 | 0.34 | 3.39 | 2.83 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 110 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.31 | 0.27 | 3.48 | 2.86 | 0.0% | 1 of 92 | 105 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.46 | 0.27 | 3.63 | 3.06 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 103 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Texas, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.33 | 0.40 | 3.50 | 2.93 | 2.2% | 0.7% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Texas, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.03 | $16.97 to $20.71 | 88,680 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $29.92 | $27.46 to $32.89 | 57,560 |
| Registered nurses | $46.14 | $38.06 to $50.53 | 271,380 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Texas | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.1 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.1 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 16.8 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.8 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 22.0 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 11.2 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.8 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.6 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Advanced Rehabilitation & Healthcare of Burleson's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (56.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
56.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Texas: 116 better, 50 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 161 eligible stays.
9.9% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Texas: 0 better, 9 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 187 eligible stays.
8.5% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Texas: 4 better, 11 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 125 eligible stays.
70.0% this home
Median of homes: Texas57.3% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 110 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Texas0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 161 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Texas1.3% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 161 residents counted.
98.7% this home
Median of homes: Texas98.5% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 75 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: HAMILTON COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT. CMS links this home to Advanced Healthcare Solutions, a group of 28 nursing homes averaging 2.9 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Se Jones Dr LLC | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 04/01/2024 | |
| Hooper, Grady | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 03/01/2024 | |
| Hooper, Grady | Corporate director | Individual | 04/01/2024 | |
| Burleson Hc, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 04/01/2024 | |
| Barrick, Scott | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2024 | |
| Ellenbogen, Moss | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2025 | |
| Silberstein, Ari | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2025 | |
| Burleson Hc, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2025 | |
| Se Jones Dr LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2024 | |
| Tetra Holdco LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2025 | |
| Barrick, Scott | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2024 | |
| Kurup, Savita | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2025 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Texas. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.