710 Hwy 55, Camp Wood, TX 78833 · Real County · (830) 597-5445
86 certified beds, about 75 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 2002
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 675931 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 31, 2025, inspectors cited 9 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 31 health citations since March 2023, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $86,254 in the last three years; the largest was $80,556, and the latest is dated February 6, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 2.77 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.26 of those hours.
CMS links it to Avir Health Group, an affiliated group of 118 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 31 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan that includes measurable objectives and time frames to meet a resident's medical and nursing needs to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for care plans in that: The facility failed to develop and/or implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan to address Resident #1's repeated entering of other residents' personal spaces. The care plan did not include individualized corrective interventions to prevent or reduce these incidents. Record review of Resident #1's face sheet, dated 7/8/26, revealed an admission date of 3/23/2026 with diagnoses that included: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the activities program was directed by a qualified professional who was a qualified therapeutic recreation specialist or an activities professional who was licensed or registered by the State for 1 of 1 Activity Directors reviewed for qualifications of activity professionals. The facility failed to have a qualified Activities Professional to direct their activities program. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of not receiving activities that were individualized to match the skills, abilities, and interests/preferences of each resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's right to formulate an advance directive for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed, in that:The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's OOH DNR was accurately reflected in her medical record and in her plan of care. This deficient practice could result in residents' end of life wishes being unknown or dishonored.
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 2 of 4 residents (Resident #1 and #2) reviewed for care plans.1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's comprehensive care plan included information accurate DNR status. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2's care plan included mouth pain and ulcers and the need to continue to follow up with medical care and interventions. These failures could place residents at risk for not having their needs and preferences met.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to assist residents in obtaining routine dental services and emergency dental services including arranging for the transportation to and from the dental services locations to meet the needs for 1 of 2 (Resident #2) residents reviewed for dental services. The facility did not ensure Resident #2 was provided transportation to a dental specialist to address his ongoing mouth infection and ulcers. This failure could place residents at risk of oral complications, dental pain, and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure medical records were maintained in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices for each resident, that were complete and accurately documented for 1 of 4 residents (Residents #1) reviewed for accuracy of medical records. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's signed and executed OOH DNR was uploaded as part of the resident's medical record. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for errors in care and treatment and inaccuracies in documentation.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, that were complete and accurately documented for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for documentation. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 had an accurately documented personal items inventory sheet for admission and discharge. This failure could place residents at risk of missing personal items at admissions, during stay, and at discharge.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, maintain medical records on each resident that were complete and accurately documented for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed medical records. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's treatment administration record noted wound care treatments on 7/4/2025, 7/14/2025 and 8/3/2025 as required by the orders noted on the electronic medical record. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving necessary care and services daily as ordered by the physician to promote proper healing of active wounds.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to conduct and document a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources are necessary to care for its residents competently during both day-to-day operations and emergencies for 1 of 1 facility's reviewed for resources necessary to care for residents competently during both day-to-day operations and emergencies. The facility admitted 79 residents without conducting and documenting a facility-wide assessment to determine what resources were necessary to care for its residents competently during both day-to-day operations and emergencies. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving competent care during day-to-day operations and emergencies.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to be informed of, and participate in, their treatments, for 3 of 8 residents (Resident #2, #25, and #59) reviewed for informed consent prior to treatment. 1. Resident #2 was administered antipsychotic and antidepression medications, trazodone, divalproex, ziprasidone, and haloperidol, without the resident's informed consent and understanding the medications' potential benefits vs the potential side effects. 2. The facility documented Resident #25's Representative's verbal consent for antiepileptic (seizure) and antipsychotic medications, without a second nurse to witness the consent and sign the consent. 3. The facility documented Resident #59's Representative's verbal consent for antipsychotic medications, without a second nurse to witness the consent and sign the consent. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, for 4 of 4 shower rooms in that: 1. The 100-hall shower room had black substance along the edges of the shower room; the baseboards were loose; tiles were cracked and had a dirty appearance. 2. The 300-hall shower room had black substance along the edges of the shower room; the baseboards were loose; tiles were cracked and had a dirty appearance. The 300-hall shower had brown substance on the one of the shower stalls and shower a grate was full of hair. 3. The secure hall shower room had black substance along the edges of the shower room; the baseboards were loose; tiles were cracked and had a dirty appearance. 4. The 400-hall shower room had black substance along the edges of the shower room; the baseboards were loose; [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews the facility failed to maintain all mechanical, electrical, and patient care equipment in safe operating condition, for 1 of 1 facility's reviewed for maintenance and operation of essential equipment. The facility failed to maintain operational 1 of the 3 commercial clothes dryers. These failures could place residents at risk for neglect and not having their hygiene needs met.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents and/or the residents' representatives the right to participate in the development and implementation of his or her person-centered plan of care for 2 of 8 residents (Residents #3 and #79) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to invite and include the input of Resident #3 and Resident #79 and/or residents' representative as members of the interdisciplinary team in Care Plan Conference meetings. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the interventions, treatments, and care necessary for the resident to reach their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being by not involving the resident and/or the residents' representative in Care Plan Conference meetings.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to inform each Medicaid-eligible resident, in writing, when the resident becomes eligible for Medicaid of those other items and services that the facility offers and for which the resident may be charged for 2 of 2 (Residents #1 and #16) residents reviewed in that: 1. Resident #1 did not provide the cost of Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage (SNF ABN). It is the facility's responsibility to inform the beneficiary about potential non-coverage and the option to continue services with the beneficiary accepting financial liability for those services. 2. Resident #16 did not provide the cost of Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage (SNF ABN). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident's drug regimen was free from chemical restraints with adequate monitoring for 1 of 8 residents reviewed for abuse, neglect and exploitation. The facility failed to ensure Resident #79 had monitoring for antidepressant medication (Paroxetine). These failures could place resident at risk for adverse drug reactions (unintended, harmful events attributed to the use of medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure that residents who are incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections and to restore continence to the extent possible, for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for indwelling urinary catheter care. The facility placed Resident #70's indwelling urinary catheter urine collection bag higher than Resident #70 bladder while in his wheelchair. This failure could place residents at risk for harm by urinary tract infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program so that the facility is free of pests and rodents for 1 of 4 shower rooms. The 100 hall-shower room had 3-4 roaches scattering, when the light was turned on. This failure could result in illness and/or psychosocial harm for residents living in areas with insects.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to file in the resident's clinical record laboratory reports that were dated and contained the name and address of the testing laboratory for 5 of 8 residents (Residents #49, #1, #48, #66, and #15) whose labs were reviewed in that: 1. Resident #49 had lab results sent to the facility on 2/20/2024 not uploaded as of 5/28/2024 [98 days after receipt], resulting in an auxiliary provider not having the information for dietary consultation. 2. Resident #1 had lab results sent to the facility on 9/28/2023 not uploaded as of 5/28/2024 [243 days after receipt]. 3. Resident #48 had lab results sent to the facility on 2/20/2024 not uploaded as of 5/28/2024 [98 days after receipt]. 4. Resident #66 had lab results sent to the facility on 2/20/2024 not uploaded as of 5/28/2024 [98 days after receipt]. 5. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to be informed of, and participate in, his or her treatment which included, the right to be informed in advance, by the physician or other practitioner or other professional, of the risks and benefits of proposed care, treatment and treatment alternatives or treatment options to choose the alternative or option he or she preferred for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for resident rights. 1. The facility failed to obtain consent for the use of sedatives, hypnotics, antidepressants, and antipsychotic medication for Resident #1. 2. The facility failed to obtain consent for the use of antipsychotic, Zyprexa, for Resident #2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide, based on the comprehensive assessment and care plan and the preferences of each resident, an ongoing program to support residents in their 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 3 of 7 residents (Resident's #1, #2, and #3) reviewed for activities. The facility failed to ensure there were organized activities provided to residents of the secured unit. This failure could place residents at risk for a diminished quality of life, isolation, lack of stimulation, and a decline in mental status.
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 2 of 4 residents (Resident #2 and #4) reviewed for accidents and supervision. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 did not elope from the facility on 10/21/2023. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4 did not elope from the facility on 8/27/2023 These failures could place residents at risk for elopement and could result in injury or a decline in health.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure professional staff were licensed, certified, or registered in accordance with applicable State laws for 1 of 4 staff (Staff C) reviewed for staff qualifications . The facility failed to ensure Staff G completed the appropriate educational requirements of a bachelor's degree in social work and was appropriately licensed to practice social work in the State of Texas. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving care and services from staff who were properly trained and supervised.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with resident rights, that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet residents' mental, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment and to ensure the comprehensive care plan described the services that were to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2's care plan indicated her risk for elopement or interventions following an actual elopement. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving appropriate care to prevent elopement. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to provide medically related social services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well-being of each resident for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for medically related social services. The facility failed to ensure a Social Worker assisted Resident #1 in obtaining a legal guardian to look after his best interest and make medically related medical decisions for the resident. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of unmet needs due to insufficient medically related social services.
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 6 of 8 Residents (Residents #1, #2, #5, #6, #7, and #8) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to place signage on the door indicating Resident #7's need for droplet isolation precautions due to positive COVID-19 status. 2. The facility failed to ensure CNA A and NA B wore a gown, gloves, and goggles or a face shield upon entering Resident #1, #2, #5 and #6's room who was on contact and droplet isolation for COVID-19. 3. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, staff, and the public in 1of 4 Halls (300 Hall/Secure Unit) observed for environmental conditions, in that: The 300 Hall/Secure Unit had a strong urine odor for 4 out of 4 days during the survey. These deficient practices could place residents at risk of decline in health due to unsanitary conditions.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program (PASRR) to the maximum extent practicable to avoid duplicative testing and effort for 2 of 24 (Resident #3 and #50) residents reviewed for PASRR, in that. 1. The facility failed to refer Resident #3 for PASRR Level 2 assessment when a diagnosis of mood disorder was diagnosed after admission on [DATE] and a diagnosis of psychotic disorder was diagnosed after admission on [DATE]. 2. The facility failed to refer Resident #50 for PASRR Level l2 assessment when a diagnosis of anxiety disorder was diagnosed after admission on [DATE] and manic episode was diagnosed after admission on [DATE]. This failure could affect residents with mental illnesses and place them at risk of not being assessed to receive needed services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living were provided with the necessary services to maintain good personal hygiene for 4 (Resident # 8, Resident # 32, Resident #20, and Resident #19) of 4 residents reviewed for ADL care, in that: The facility failed to ensure that Residents #8, #32, #20, and #19 were provided bathing as scheduled: 1. Resident #8 missed 3 of 13 scheduled baths between 3/01/2023 and 3/30/2023. 2. Resident #32 missed 13 of 13 scheduled baths between 3/01/2023 and 3/30/2023. 3. Resident #20 missed 4 of 13 scheduled baths between 3/01/2023 and 3/30/2023. 4. Resident #19 missed 9 of 13 scheduled baths between 3/01/2023 and 3/30/2023. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a comprehensive assessment of 1 of 24 residents (Resident #4) in that 1-The facility failed to do a comprehensive assessment for Resident #4 that included her hand and arm tremors. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of receiving inadequate assessments that are not individualized to their care needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs for 1 of 24 residents (Resident #64) reviewed for care plans, in that: 1. The facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan that addressed Residents #64's anti-coagulant therapy. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of receiving inadequate interventions that are not individualized to their care needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments in 1 of 5 medication storage carts (300/400 Nurses Medication Cart) observed for drug security in that: The 300/400 Nurses Medication Cart was left unattended and unlocked in a public, common area. This deficient practice could place residents and visitors at risk of medication misuse and diversion. During an observation and interview on 3/28/2023 at 2:26 PM, the 300/400 Nurses Medication Cart was observed to be unlocked and unattended at the half wall surrounding the nurses' station. The 300/400 Nurses Medication Cart was observed to have prescription and over the counter medications. Residents, staff and visitors were observed in the immediate vicinity. [...]
13 fire safety citations on file: 9 on July 31, 2025, 1 on May 31, 2024, 3 on March 31, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| February 6, 2024 | Fine | $5,698 |
| November 6, 2023 | Fine | $80,556 |
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) | 2.77 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.26 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.52 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.89 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.62 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | not reported | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | not reported | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 2 |
CMS expects 3.22 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 2.87 on weekdays and 2.52 on weekends, 12% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 26.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 2.78 in April to June 2025 to 2.77 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 | 2.77 | 0.26 | 2.87 | 2.52 | 26.0% | 0 of 90 | 75 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 2.97 | 0.22 | 3.10 | 2.63 | 30.2% | 2 of 92 | 77 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.84 | 0.20 | 3.86 | 3.79 | 0.0% | 2 of 92 | 79 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 2.78 | 0.21 | 2.83 | 2.67 | 24.5% | 0 of 91 | 80 |
| 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.
Trains nurse aides: this home runs a state-approved CNA program (state list: HHSC Approved NATCEP Providers, as of October 6, 2026). A nursing home cannot charge aides it employs, or has offered a job, for state-approved training (42 CFR 483.152(c)). See Avir at Camp Wood CNA training on CareerFunded, our sister site for career training.
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 | 9.8 | 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 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.9 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.3 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.0 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 35.0 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 39.5 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 9.8 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.1 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 4.0 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Avir at Camp Wood's Medicare short-stay residents. How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
Not reported
CMS note: The data for this measure is missing or was not submitted. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
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.
11.7% 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. 45 eligible stays.
9.1% 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. 33 eligible stays.
5.0% 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. 20 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. 26 residents counted.
7.7% 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. 26 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims for this measure.
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.
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: UVALDE COUNTY HOSPITAL AUTHORITY. CMS links this home to Avir Health Group, a group of 118 nursing homes averaging 2.3 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 700 12th Street Property Owner, LLC | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 03/01/2025 | |
| Welltower Inc | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 03/01/2025 | |
| Welltower Nnn Group, LLC | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 03/01/2025 | |
| Welltower Op, LLC | 5% or greater security interest | Organization | 03/01/2025 | |
| Apolinar, Adam | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/01/2025 | |
| Contreras, Terri | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/29/2019 | |
| 710 Hwy 55 Opco, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 03/01/2025 | |
| Contreras, Terri | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/29/2019 | |
| Corrigan, Lori | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/16/2024 | |
| Freund, Nochum | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/01/2025 | |
| Preddy, John | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/01/2025 | |
| Travitsky, Aaron | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/01/2025 | |
| Dagan, Amitai | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 04/24/2025 | |
| Goldberger, Abraham | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 04/24/2025 | |
| 700 12th Street Property Owner, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/01/2025 | |
| 710 Hwy 55 Opco, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/24/2025 | |
| Welltower Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/01/2025 | |
| Welltower Nnn Group, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/01/2025 | |
| Welltower Op, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/01/2025 | |
| Contreras, Terri | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/29/2019 | |
| Corrigan, Lori | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/16/2024 | |
| Preddy, John | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 03/01/2025 |
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.