321 Kilgore Drive, Henderson, TX 75652 · Rusk County · (903) 657-1923
125 certified beds, about 99 residents a day · Government - Hospital district · Medicare and Medicaid since 2004
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 676025 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on May 7, 2026, inspectors cited 12 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 42 health citations since January 2024, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $14,901 in the last three years; the largest was $14,901, and the latest is dated June 24, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 2.79 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.23 of those hours.
56.8% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Ml Healthcare, an affiliated group of 6 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 42 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to establish a system of records of receipt and disposition of all controlled drugs in sufficient detail to enable an accurate reconciliation for the facility's only discontinued narcotic drug storage reviewed for reconciliation. The facility failed to ensure they had a log of the discontinued narcotic drug storage on 05/05/26. This failure could place residents at risk for missing medications and medication errors.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to develop, and implement a comprehensive care plan to meet the medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs for 5 of 13 residents reviewed for care plans. (Resident #41, Resident #84, Resident #09, Resident #98, and Resident # 108)The facility failed to include in the care plan services Resident # 41 was a 2-person transfer with a Mechanical lift. The facility failed to include in the care plan services refused by Resident # 84 (left hand splints and dietary recommendations). The facility failed to develop and implement Resident #9's care plan for upper and lower extremity limited ROM.The facility failed to develop and implement Resident #98's care plan for wandering. The facility failed to develop and implement Resident #108's care plan for falls. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to act upon the recommendations of the pharmacies report of irregularities for 3 of 7 residents (Resident #1, #88 and #108) reviewed for (DRR) Drug Regimen Review. 1. The facility failed to ensure a proper rationale was given for not following the pharmacy consultant's recommendation for a trial dose reduction for Resident #1's Oxcarbazepine (an anticonvulsant medication sometimes used off-label as a mood stabilizer), Trazodone (an antidepressant commonly used to treat major depressive disorder, anxiety disorders, and insomnia), and Alprazolam (a benzodiazepine used to treat anxiety disorders, panic disorders, and anxiety associated with depression). 2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, record reviews, and observation, the facility failed to consistently serve a suitable, nourishing alternative meals and snacks to residents who want to eat at non-traditional times or outside of scheduled meal service times for 5 of 5 residents reviewed for snacks. (AR #1, AR #2, AR #3, AR #4 and AR #5) The facility failed to offer an evening nourishing snack routinely for residents on 4/5/2026 to 4/6/2026. This failure could put residents at risk of experiencing complications of diabetes such as low blood sugar, weight loss, or hunger during the night. During a confidential interview at an undisclosed date and time, AR#1 stated that the staff left snacks at the nurse station and residents must get snacks. The anonymous resident stated that not all residents were able to get out of bed to get snacks in the evening and not every resident was offered evening snacks. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and provide care in a manner that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 1 of 13 residents reviewed for resident rights. (Resident #108) The facility failed to protect and promote the rights of Resident #108 by using inappropriate techniques to check the resident for the need for incontinent care. These failures could place residents at risk for decreased self-esteem, decreased privacy and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident's drug regimen was free from unnecessary psychotropic drugs and PRN orders for psychotropic drugs were limited to 14 days for 2 of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary psychotropic drugs (Resident #23, and Resident #108). 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #23 did not have a PRN order for lorazepam 0.5 mg (a prescription medication used to treat anxiety disorders-feelings of fear, dread, and uneasiness) after 14 days without an evaluation by the physician for continued treatment with a rationale in the resident's medical record and a duration for the PRN order. 2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received appropriate treatment and services to prevent further decrease of ROM (Range of Motion) for 1 of 23 residents (Resident #107) reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #107 had a contracture prevention device in place for treatment of her right-hand and left-hand contractures. This failure could place residents at risk for decrease in mobility and range of motion and contribute to worsening of contractures.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 of 21 residents (Resident #29) reviewed for adequate supervision. The facility failed to securely store hydrogen peroxide and Isopropyl Alcohol 50% for Resident #29. This failure could place residents at risk for adverse reactions.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident with bowel and urinary incontinence, received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections and restore continence to the extent possible 2 of 2 residents to reviewed for urinary and bowel incontinence (Resident #11 and Resident #41)The facility failed to ensure Resident #11 had a catheter securement device in place on 05/07/26. The facility failed to ensure CNA N and CAN M performed proper incontinent care by ensuring Resident #41 was completely clean after bowel movement and before placing a new brief on 3/5/2026. These failures could place residents at an increased risk for urinary tract infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to provide or obtain laboratory services to meet the needs of 1 of 13 residents reviewed for laboratory services. (Resident #108) The facility failed to obtain the following labs for Resident #108 per physician's orders:BMP- basic metabolic panel (a common blood test that measures eight key substances to evaluate kidney function, fluid/electrolyte balance, and blood sugar levels)Lipid panel (a routine blood test that measures cholesterol and triglyceride levels to evaluate cardiovascular risk, including potential heart disease and stroke risk)Liver panel (a blood test that measures enzymes, proteins, and bilirubin to assess liver health, damage, or disease)These failures could place residents at risk of not having their medications at a therapeutic level, delays in treatment, and/or deterioration in condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 2 of 22 residents (Residents #13 and Resident #11) reviewed for infection control practices.1. The facility failed to properly store or dispose of a used feeding tube syringe for Resident #13.2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #11's catheter bag was not lying on the floor on 05/04/26. These failures placed residents at risk for cross contamination and infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to promote antibiotic stewardship by ensuring the appropriate use of antibiotic therapy and providing written rationale, by the provider, when an antibiotic was used despite criteria, to determine the appropriate use of an antibiotic for 2 of 9 residents reviewed for antibiotic use (Resident #16 and Resident #68). 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #16 did not have an order for Cephalexin (an antibiotic used to treat a variety of bacterial infections) for prophylactic antibiotic use. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #68 did not have an order for Macrobid (an antibiotic used to treat bacterial infections) for prophylactic antibiotic use. These failures could place residents receiving antibiotics at risk for unnecessary antibiotic use, inappropriate antibiotic use, and increased antibiotic-resistant infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and records 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 1 of 6 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for Resident Rights. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was treated with respect and dignity when CNAs spoke rudely and disrespectfully to him. This failure could place residents at risk of psychosocial harm, self-isolation, and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, observations and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's comprehensive care plan was implemented on 1/7/2026 and 1/10/2026 by having two people provide incontinent care to Resident #1. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving care and services to meet individualized medical and nursing needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as was possible and each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accident hazards. CNA A and CNA B failed to lock Resident #1's bed wheels before they raised Resident #1's bed, before they performed peri-care (removal of soiled brief, the cleaning of the genital/ anal areas and placement of a clean brief which required turning Resident #1 side to side in the bed) and pulling Resident #1 up in the bed on 10/23/25. This failure could place residents at risk of significant injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and records review the facility failed to ensure residents who required dialysis received such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for Dialysis. The facility failed to ensure the appropriate dialysis port care was provided to Resident #1 on 8/5/25, 8/7/25, 8/9/25, 8/16/25, 8/19/25, and 9/6/25 when the facility failed to remove the dialysis port (access point for dialysis) dressing as ordered by the dialysis center. This failure could place residents at risk of infection, hospitalization, and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents' environment remained free from accident hazards and the residents received adequate supervision and assistance to prevent accidents for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents. The facility failed to provide Resident #1 with adequate supervision and assistance on 3/25/25 when a mechanical lift (specialized device designed to safely transfer individuals with limited mobility) sling broke while CNA A was conducting a mechanical lift transfer without the required two (2) staff members, causing Resident #1 to fall from the mechanical lift sling and sustain a minor injury, a hematoma (collection of blood) on the back of her head. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) situation was determined to have begun on 3/25/2025 and ended on 3/27/25. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident had the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences for 3 of 19 (Resident #64, Resident #74 and Resident #76) residents reviewed for call lights. The facility failed to ensure call lights were within reach while Resident #64, Resident #74 and Resident #76 were in bed. This failure could place residents at risk for a delay in assistance and decreased quality of life, self-worth, and dignity.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident who needed respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, the residents' goals, and preferences for 5 of 11 residents (Resident #42, Resident #246, Resident #16, Resident #9, and Resident #33) reviewed for respiratory care and services. The facility failed to properly store Resident #246's Nasal Cannula. The facility failed to change the dirty filters for Resident #16. The facility failed to ensure Resident #42's oxygen concentrator was set at 2 LPM, as ordered by the physician. The facility failed to ensure Resident #9's oxygen concentrator filter was without white fuzzy particles. The facility failed to ensure Resident #33's oxygen concentrator filter was without white fuzzy particles. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles, included the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions, and the expiration date when applicable for 1 of 1 medication storage rooms and to provide pharmaceutical services including procedures that assure the accurate administering of all drugs and biologicals, to meet the needs of 2 of 19 residents (Resident #50 and Resident #47) reviewed for medications storage and pharmacy services. 1. The facility failed to remove expired over the counter medications from the Medication Storage room. 2. The facility failed to ensure narcotic counts were accurate for Resident # 50's Belsomra 10 mg (medication used for insomnia) for medication cart on Hall 100 at shift change on [DATE]. 3. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure in accordance with state and federal laws, all drugs and biologicals were stored in locked compartments for 5 of 29 residents (Residents #29, #39, #42, #55, and #84) reviewed for storage of medication. 1. The facility failed to securely store Resident #29's Benadryl and Neosporin cream found at her bedside table on 3/17/2025. 2. The facility failed to securely store Resident # 39's Systane eye drops found at her bedside table on 3/17/2025. 3. The facility failed to securely store Resident #42's Oxymetazoline HCL 0.05% (nasal decongestant) and a powdery substance in a medication cup located on beside table on 3/17/2025. 4. The facility failed to securely store Resident # 84's Visine eye drops located on her bedside table on 3/17/2025. 5. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to a clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, which included but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safety, for 1 of 4 halls (Hall 200) reviewed for a homelike environment. The facility failed to ensure Hall 200's armed exit door near the designated smoke area and laundry, was functioning correctly and not alarming on 3/17/25 and 3/18/25. This failure could place residents at risk for diminished quality of life in an environment that is not homelike.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to promote resident self-determination through support of resident choice for 1 of 19 residents reviewed for resident rights. (Resident #64) The facility did not assist Resident #64 out of bed as often has he preferred. This failure could place dependent residents at risk for feelings of depression, lack self-determination and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 of 19 residents reviewed for assessments. (Resident #48) The facility failed to ensure Resident #48's MDS dated [DATE], was coded for receiving an anticonvulsant medication (help treat and prevent seizures). The facility failed to ensure Resident #48's MDS dated [DATE], was coded for receiving a hypoglycemic medication (used to lower blood sugar levels in individuals with diabetes). These failures could place residents at risk of not having individual needs met.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide the necessary services to maintain personal hygiene for 2 of 4 residents reviewed for ADLs (Residents #246 and Resident #18.) The facility did not change the adult brief for Resident #246 in a timely manner leaving her in a urine-soaked brief. The facility failed to shave Resident #18 facial hair. This failure could place residents who required assistance from staff for ADLs at risk of not receiving care and services to meet their needs which could result in poor care, risk for skin breakdown, feelings of poor self-esteem, lack of dignity and health.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who had a urinary catheter received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections to the extent possible for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for catheter care. (Resident #24) The facility failed to drain urine from Resident #24's urinary catheter bag. The facility failed to keep Resident #24's urinary catheter bag off the floor. These failures could place residents at risk for the spread of urinary tract infections, making the residents high risk for pain, confusion and sepsis (infections that spread to the blood) from severe urinary tract infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications was provided for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for feeding tube management. (Resident #47 and Resident #52) The facility failed to ensure Resident #47 and Resident #52 had a physician order for the volume, frequency, and type of flush to administer via the feeding tube. The facility failed to ensure Resident #47 and Resident #52 had a physician order on the frequency of cleaning and the care of the site on the feeding tube. The facility failed to ensure Resident #47 and Resident #52 had a physician order on the frequency of residual checks (assess the rate of gastric emptying) for the feeding tube. The facility failed to ensure Resident #47 and Resident #52 had a physician order on the frequency of checking placement for the feeding tube. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident's drug regimen was free from unnecessary medications (is a medication used: In excessive doses (including duplicate therapy); or for excessive duration; or without adequate monitoring; or without adequate indication for its use; or in the presence of adverse consequences which indicate the dose should be reduced or discontinued) for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #22) reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility failed to ensure Resident #22 did not received Nitrofurantoin Macrocrystal (is used to treat urinary tract infections (is a bacterial infection in the urinary system)) for prophylactic use. [...]
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 29 residents (Resident # 20) reviewed for infection control practices. 1. The facility failed to ensure LVN O applied enhanced barrier precautions while providing medication administration to Resident # 20 on 3/18/2025 at 1:18 PM. These failures could place residents at risk of cross-contamination and infections leading to illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to promote antibiotic stewardship by ensuring the appropriate use of antibiotic therapy and providing written rationale, by the provider, when an antibiotic was used despite criteria, to determine the appropriate the use of an antibiotic for 1 of 2 residents reviewed antibiotic use. (Resident #47) The facility failed to ensure Resident #47 received the appropriate antibiotic to treat her urinary tract infection on 2/22/25. This failure could place residents receiving antibiotics at risk for unnecessary antibiotic use, inappropriate antibiotic use, and increased antibiotic-resistant infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to allow residents to obtain a copy of the records or any portions thereof upon request and 2 working days advance notice to the family for 1 of 1 (Resident #1) residents reviewed for the right to access copies of records. The facility failed to provide medical records for Resident #1 to her attorney within two working days of a request on 07/31/2024. This failure could place residents at risk by causing a negative health impact due to not having continuity of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who need respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan and the resident's goals and preferences, for 3 of 11 residents (Residents #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Residents #1, #2 and #3's oxygen tubing and humidifier bottle was changed and dated as ordered. These failures could place residents at risk for upper respiratory infections and worsening of their physical condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan to meet each resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs for 4 of 18 residents (Residents #3, #7, #58 and #65) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to care plan the use of oxygen therapy for Resident #3. The facility failed care plan the use of oxygen therapy for Resident #7. The facility failed to care plan the use of oxygen therapy for Resident #58. The facility failed to care plan the use of oxygen therapy for Resident #65. These failures could place residents at risk of not having individual needs met and cause residents not to receive needed services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents requiring respiratory care are provided care, consistent with professional standards of practices for 10 of 13 residents reviewed for respiratory care (Residents #3, #50, #62, #65, #43, #7, #25, #58, #66 and #21). 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #3's had an order for oxygen, the humidifier and tubing for the oxygen concentrator were dated and the filter was clean and free of dust buildup. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #50's oxygen concentrator had an external filter and was free of dust buildup. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #62's had an order for oxygen, the oxygen tubing was changed per the facility's policy and the concentrator filter was free of dust buildup. 4. The facility did not obtain orders for Resident #65's oxygen. 5. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, 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 6 residents (Resident #38) and 2 of 6 staff (CNA E and CNA L) reviewed for infection control. CNA E failed to perform proper hand hygiene during meal service on 1/29/2024. CNA L failed to perform proper hand hygiene while providing incontinent care to Resident #38 on 01/30/2024. These failures could place residents at risk of exposure to communicable diseases and infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to promote care for residents in a manner and in an environment that maintained or enhanced each resident's dignity for 1 of 3 residents (Resident # 58) reviewed for dignity. The facility failed to ensure Resident # 58's urinary drainage bag had a dignity/privacy cover. This failure could place residents in the facility at risk for a diminished quality of life, loss of dignity and self-worth.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure all residents had the right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment for 2 of 17 resident rooms (room [ROOM NUMBER] and room [ROOM NUMBER]) reviewed for homelike environment. The facility failed to ensure the walls in rooms [ROOM NUMBERS] were free from holes. The facility failed to ensure the walls in room [ROOM NUMBER] were kept clean. These failures could place residents at risk for diminished quality of life due to the lack of a well- kept and clean environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected the resident status for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #62) reviewed for MDS assessment accuracy. The facility did not accurately document Resident #62's oxygen therapy on the quarterly MDS dated [DATE]. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who is unable to carry out activities of daily living receives the necessary services to maintain personal hygiene for 2 of 10 residents (Resident #8, Resident #16) reviewed for ADL's. The facility failed to ensure Resident #8's and Resident #16's nails were kept clean. This failure could place residents who required assistance from staff for ADLs at risk of not receiving care and services to meet their needs which could result in poor care, risk for skin breakdown, feelings of poor self-esteem, lack of dignity and health.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure and 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 1 of 6 ( Resident #70) residents reviewed for pharmaceutical services, in that: Resident #70's medications (Systane ultra pf lubricant eye drops, Pataday once daily relief eye allergy solution, and Systane lubricant eye drops and a bottle of ninety soft gel capsules of PreserVision eye supplements) were found on the bedside table with no attached labels for use. These deficient practices could place residents at risk of not receiving the intended therapeutic effect of the medications resulting in exacerbation of the resident's condition and disease process.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop, implement, and maintain an effective training program for 1 of 15 employees (CNA O) new and existing staff reviewed for training. The facility failed to ensure CNA O was trained on fall prevention on hire. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving care to attain or maintain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being due to lack of staff training.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide the required education on the rights of the resident and the responsibilities of a facility to properly care for its residents for 1 of 15 employees (LVN N) reviewed for training, in that: The facility failed to ensure required education was provided on the rights of the resident and responsibilities of a facility to properly care for its residents was conducted by LVN N annually. This failure could affect residents and place them at risk of being uninformed due to lack of staff training.
8 fire safety citations on file: 4 on May 7, 2026, 4 on March 19, 2025.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| June 24, 2025 | Fine | $14,901 |
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) | 2.79 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.23 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.44 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.87 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.69 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 56.8% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 20.0% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.08 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 2.93 on weekdays and 2.44 on weekends, 17% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 15.9% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.09 in April to June 2025 to 2.79 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 | 2.79 | 0.23 | 2.93 | 2.44 | 15.9% | 0 of 90 | 99 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 2.98 | 0.21 | 3.15 | 2.56 | 10.1% | 0 of 92 | 94 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 2.99 | 0.23 | 3.13 | 2.64 | 15.1% | 0 of 92 | 99 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.09 | 0.26 | 3.24 | 2.70 | 11.7% | 0 of 91 | 88 |
| 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 | 7.9 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.6 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.6 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.4 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.8 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.7 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.5 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 22.8 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 8.4 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.9 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.0 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Autumn Leaves Nursing and Rehab Inc's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (65.4% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
65.4% this home
Better than 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. 121 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. 163 eligible stays.
6.0% 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. 91 eligible stays.
75.3% 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. 77 residents counted.
0.9% 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. 112 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. 112 residents counted.
100.0% 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. 58 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: FRIO HOSPITAL DISTRICT. CMS links this home to Ml Healthcare, a group of 6 nursing homes averaging 2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frio Hospital District | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 12/01/2022 |
| Ml Real Estate-Henderson, LLC | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 12/01/2022 | |
| Langsdale, Troy | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Individual | 12/01/2022 | |
| Miller, Laura | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Individual | 12/01/2022 | |
| Ruff, Michael | Corporate officer | Individual | 12/01/2022 | |
| Ml-Henderson LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 12/01/2022 | |
| Langsdale, Troy | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2022 | |
| Miller, Laura | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2022 | |
| Vozza, Brenda | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2022 | |
| Ml Real Estate-Henderson, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/01/2022 | |
| Ml-Henderson LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 05/27/2025 | |
| Langsdale, Troy | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2022 | |
| Miller, Laura | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2022 | |
| Turner, Victor | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2022 | |
| Vozza, Brenda | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2022 |
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.