6700 Heritage Parkway, Rockwall, TX 75087 · Rockwall County · (972) 412-4000
190 certified beds, about 154 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1996
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 675579 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on November 20, 2025, inspectors cited 3 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 27 health citations since June 2023, 3 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (2 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $21,817 in the last three years; the largest was $13,627, and the latest is dated August 22, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.40 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.29 of those hours.
41.0% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to The Ensign Group, an affiliated group of 344 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 27 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide each resident with a nourishing, palatable, well-balanced diet that met his or her daily nutritional and special dietary needs, taking into consideration the preferences of each resident for three (Resident #1, #2, and #3) of ten residents reviewed for food preferences. The facility failed to provide hot palatable oatmeal at the breakfast meal for Residents #1, # 2, 3, and #4. This deficient practice could put residents at risk of weight loss, an increase of feelings of self-worth, and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to immediately inform the resident, consult with the resident's physician, and notify, consistent with his or her authority, the resident's representative when there was a significant change in the resident's physical, mental, or psychosocial status in either life threatening conditions or clinical complications for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for change in condition. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's RP was notified when Resident #1 was found sitting up in bed with his midline IV (flexible catheter inserted into a vein in the arm) removed from his left arm on 12/03/25, which resulted in his arm having to be elevated and wrapped to lessen any swelling and bleeding. This failure could place residents at risk of their RP not being aware of conditions that may require them to make medical decisions.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the facility's only kitchen, reviewed for food safety.1. The facility failed to correctly discard food by the use by date for 1 storage bag of cheese.2. The facility failed to discard a dented can of soup.3. The facility failed to use or discard a tray with four containers of sliced/chopped vegetables by the discard dateThese failures could place residents at risk for food-borne illness and cross contamination.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to provide each resident with a dignified existence, self-determination, and communication with and access to persons and services inside and outside the facility for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #13) reviewed for resident rights.1. The facility failed to remove Resident #13 from contact isolation as ordered. Failure could place residents at risk for diminished quality of life, loss of dignity and self-worth.
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 2 (MA A) staff members and 3 of 4 residents (Residents #21, #91, and #42) reviewed for infection control procedures. MA A failed to disinfect the blood pressure cuff in between blood pressure checks for Residents #21, #91, and #42. These failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination and infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to the resident had a right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely for one (Resident#1) of four reviewed for environment. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's sheets were clean and free of any stains. This failure could place residents at risk for a reduced quality of life and unsanitary and hazardous living conditions.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan was reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment including both the comprehensive assessment and quarterly review assessments for one (Resident #1) of four residents were reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility failed to ensure the interdisciplinary team revised and reviewed Resident #1's care plan quarterly. This failure could affect residents by placing them at risk for not having their individual needs met.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that are complete and accurately documented for 1 (Resident #2) of 4 residents reviewed for accuracy of medical records. The facility failed to ensure the nursing notes accurately reflected Resident #2's condition. The nursing notes dated 08/17/2024 indicated the resident had old bruises to the bilateral upper arms, chest area and knees that were old however those bruises were new following the fall on 08/17/2024. These failures could place residents at risk for medication and /or treatment errors and omissions in care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure personal privacy during incontinent care for 4 (Residents#78,#71,#38, and #3) of 15 residents reviewed for privacy. The facility failed to ensure Residents#78,#71,#38, and #3 were not put at risk of being exposed to view from the outside of the facility and to other windows of the facility during incontinent care or getting dressed. This failure could place other residents at risk for embarrassment and loss of self-esteem and dignity.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide a resident has a right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment for three of six resident halls (100, 200 hall and 300 hall) reviewed for physical environment. 1. The facility failed to ensure the intake vent at beginning of 100 hall was kept clean. 2. The facility failed to ensure resident rooms (102, 106 and 133) had a complete set of lateral blinds. 3. The facility failed to ensure resident room [ROOM NUMBER] was maintained with baseboards in place and the wall not exposed. 4. The facility failed to ensure hall 300 had safe handrails. These failures placed residents at risk for an unsanitary, unsafe, and uncomfortable environment.
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 service safety in the facility's only kitchen, reviewed for food safety. 1. The facility failed to ensure food items in the refrigerators, freezer and dry storage room were labeled with the item description, the received by date, the opened date, the discard by and or expiration dates; stored in accordance with the professional standards for food service. 2. The facility failed to discard opened items stored in refrigerator, freezers and dry storage that were not properly labeled with the opened or prepped by date and or past the 'best buy', consume by or the manufacturer's expiration dates. 3. The facility failed to ensure multiple food items stored in a bin/container were each clearly identifiable. 4. [...]
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 3 (CNA M, CNA P, and CNA Q) of 3 staff members for infection control procedures. CNA M, CNA P and CNA Q failed to perform hand hygiene after direct contact with Residents #3, #31, and #76 while serving meals on the hallways. This failure could place residents at risk for healthcare associated cross contamination and infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remains as free of accident hazards as is possible and that residents received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for one (Resident #139) resident of three residents reviewed for assisted transfer. The facility failed to ensure on 02/01/2024 PT K used the Hoyer lift ( mechanical/patient lift designed to assist caregivers move patients from one place to another) correctly, attach the Hoyer lift sling pad and condcuted with assistance of a second person as care planned, when he transferred Resident #139 from his wheelchair to the bed. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for one (Resident #1) of five residents reviewed for medications. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was provided his medications and not the medications of Resident #2, when he went on therapeutic leave on 06/02/24. This failure placed residents at risk of consuming unprescribed medications, harm, and hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure if a hospice care was furnished through an agreement, a provision that the LTC facility immediately notified the hospice about a significant change in the resident's physical, mental, social, or emotional status for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #1) reviewed for hospice care. The facility failed to immediately notify Resident #1's hospice agency of falls and change of condition that occurred on 2/22/24 and 2/25/24. This failure could place residents at risk to a decline in health.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to honor the resident right to choose his or her attending physician for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for resident rights. The facility did not honor Resident #1's right to choose his primary care physician as his attending physician when readmitted to the facility on [DATE]. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of decreased quality care and treatment due to their lack of free choice for their attending physician care while in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record the facility failed to ensure, based on the comprehensive assessment of a resident, the residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan and the residents choices for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #7) reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7 was accurately assessed, monitored, and treated for a change of condition when the resident was found to be in pain on 09/10/23 at approximately 10:30 PM. Resident #7 was not immediately sent to the hospital for emergency medical care. She was sent to the hospital on [DATE] after therapy staff notified the nurse of a leg deformity. At the hospital, Resident #7 was diagnosed with fractures of her left tibula and fibula (two bones in the lower leg, calf/shin area). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide housekeeping and maintenance services necessary to maintain a sanitary, orderly, and comfortable interior for 7 of 10 resident rooms (Rooms #114, #118, #124, #131, #203, #219, and #223) reviewed for environment. The facility failed to ensure resident rooms were cleaned daily, and in accordance with the facility's 5- Step Daily Housekeeping Procedure. This deficient practice could negatively impact the facility's ability in preventing the spread of disease-causing organisms in residents' living areas. Findings Include: In interview and observation on 09/07/23 at 10:07 AM of room [ROOM NUMBER] revealed food crumbs, crumbled paper napkins, and three patches of a gray sticky substance on the floor around the bed. A dead cricket was on the floor by the window. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 3 of 5 residents (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3) reviewed for ADL care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1, Resident #2 and Resident #3 received timely incontinent care. This failure could put residents at risk of impaired skin integrity and decreased feelings of self-worth and dignity.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services, including procedures that assured the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing and administering of all drugs and biologicals, to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to administer Resident #1's tramadol HCI oral tablet on 09/02/23 at 1:00 PM and 09/03/23 at 1:00 PM for pain. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of not receiving the therapeutic effect of medications and a drug diversion.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, medical records were maintained on each resident that were complete, accurately documented, readily accessible, and systematically organized for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #7) reviewed for medical records . 1. The facility failed to ensure LVN F documented Resident #7 had a change in condition and was assessed when CNA H reported seeing Resident #7 grimacing in pain. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7's electronic medical record accurately documented the residents level of assistance needed. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received adequate monitoring and supervision to prevent elopement for 1 of 1 (Resident #133) reviewed for accidents hazards/supervision. The facility failed to implement interventions to prevent elopement and failed to adequately supervise Resident #133 to prevent him from leaving the facility on 06/05/2023 without staff knowledge. Resident #133 was located 0.4 miles away from the facility. This failure could place residents requiring supervision at risk for serious injury and death. In Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified to have existed from 06/05/2023 to 06/05/2023. The IJ was determined to be at past noncompliance as the facility had implemented actions that corrected the noncompliance prior to the beginning of the survey. [...]
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 service safety in the facility's only kitchen. 1. Facility dishwasher aide M failed to cover beard and hair while working in the kitchen. 2. Facility cook H failed to cover beard, hair, and face mask upon entering the kitchen. These failures could affect residents who received their meals from the facility's only kitchen by placing them at risk for food-borne illness and food contamination.
Inspectors wroteBased observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, sanitary, and homelike environment for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #82) observed for environment. The facility failed to ensure Resident #82's room was sanitary and homelike. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment to attain or maintain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Findings Included: Review of Resident #82 Face Sheet, dated 06/28/23, revealed she was an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] from the hospital, Relevant diagnoses included chronic kidney disease, type 2 diabetes, pneumonia, anxiety disorder, coronary artery disease. Review of Resident #82's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE] stated she was moderately cognitively impaired with a BIMS score of 08. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure all drugs were stored in a locked compartment, only accessible by authorized personnel, and labeled and dated correctly for 2 of 5 medication carts (medication cart #1 and medication cart #2) observed for medication storage reviewed for medication labeling. The facility did not ensure that 2 medication carts were secured and unable to be accessed by unauthorized personnel and residents on the 100 hall. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving drugs and biologicals as needed, medications being used passed their effective or expiration date, and a drug diversion.
Inspectors wroteBased 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 two (Resident #190 and Resident #191) of five residents observed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure MA A sanitized the blood pressure device and cuff between resident #190 and Resident #191. This failure placed residents at risk of cross-contamination and infections. Review of Resident #190's Face Sheet, dated 06/28/23, revealed he was a [AGE] year-old male admitted for rehabilitation on 06/22/23 from the hospital, Relevant diagnoses included muscle weakness, gait and mobility abnormalities, lack of coordination, reduced mobility, hypertension, and epilepsy. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program to ensure the facility was free of pests for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #82) observed for environment. The facility failed to ensure Resident #82's room remained free of pests. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment to attain or maintain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. Findings Included: Review of Resident #82 Face Sheet, dated 06/28/23, revealed she was an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE] from the hospital, Relevant diagnoses included chronic kidney disease, type 2 diabetes, pneumonia, anxiety disorder, coronary artery disease. Review of Resident #82's Quarterly MDS, dated [DATE] stated she was moderately cognitively impaired with a BIMS score of 08. [...]
11 fire safety citations on file: 4 on November 20, 2025, 3 on August 22, 2024, 4 on June 30, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| August 22, 2024 | Fine | $13,627 |
| September 20, 2023 | Fine | $8,190 |
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) | 3.40 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.29 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.00 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.11 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.00 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 41.0% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 55.6% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 4.21 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 3.56 on weekdays and 3.00 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 3.39 in April to June 2025 to 3.40 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 | 3.40 | 0.29 | 3.56 | 3.00 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 154 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.32 | 0.27 | 3.45 | 2.98 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 158 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.33 | 0.31 | 3.47 | 2.96 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 147 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.39 | 0.28 | 3.56 | 2.99 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 139 |
| 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.
| 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 | 25.3 | 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 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.8 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.2 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 22.6 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.4 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.3 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 20.8 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 10.4 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.0 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.3 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Beacon Harbor Healthcare and Rehabilitation's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (58.0% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
58.0% 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. 150 eligible stays.
10.1% 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. 183 eligible stays.
7.2% 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. 105 eligible stays.
64.1% 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. 64 residents counted.
1.0% 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. 99 residents counted.
1.7% 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. 99 residents counted.
91.3% 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. 23 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: EASTLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL DISTRICT. CMS links this home to The Ensign Group, a group of 344 nursing homes averaging 3.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eastland Memorial Hospital District | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 03/01/2024 | |
| The Ensign Group Inc | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 01/30/2006 | |
| Blumquist, Cory | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 12/01/2019 | |
| Katikaneni, Shalini | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Burnam, Soon | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/01/2024 | |
| Keetch, Chad | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/01/2011 | |
| Taylor, Stephen | Corporate officer | Individual | 07/01/2025 | |
| Myrtle Springs Healthcare, Inc. | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 03/01/2024 | |
| Blumquist, Cory | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2019 | |
| Katikaneni, Shalini | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Clovis Point Health Holdings LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/01/2019 | |
| Ensign Services Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/02/2019 | |
| Myrtle Springs Healthcare, Inc. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/11/2025 | |
| Standard Bearer Healthcare Op, LP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/01/2019 | |
| The Ensign Group Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/01/2019 | |
| Blumquist, Cory | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2019 | |
| Katikaneni, Shalini | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2021 |
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.