2201 Menard Hwy, Brady, TX 76825 · Mc Culloch County · (325) 597-2906
106 certified beds, about 38 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 2004
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 676034 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on September 4, 2025, inspectors cited 3 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 23 health citations since July 2023, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $10,527 in the last three years; the largest was $10,527, and the latest is dated August 22, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.33 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.49 of those hours.
45.7% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Ruby Healthcare, an affiliated group of 7 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 23 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled with currently accepted professional principles, and included the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions, and the expiration date when applicable for and 1 of 2 medication carts (Hall A & B nurse medication cart) reviewed for medication storage. The facility failed to ensure the nurses cart #1 for the A& B Hall did not contain insulin, and nebulizer treatment vials that were opened and not labeled with the open date. This failure could place residents at risk of adverse medication reactions.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food under sanitary conditions for 1 of 1 main kitchen in that: [NAME] B took the dinner rolls with her hands to place them on the residents plates when plating the lunch meal. These failures could place residents who ate food from the kitchen at risk of foodborne illness.
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 to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #5, and Resident #1) and 4 of 4 (NA #A, MA #F, ADON, and Director of Rehab) staff members reviewed for infection control in that;The facility failed to ensure NA A changed her gloves after they became contaminated during incontinent care while assisting Resident #5. The facility failed to ensure LVN B performed hand hygiene between glove changes while providing wound care for Resident #1. The facility failed to ensure NA #A, ADON, and Director of Rehab were tested for Tuberculosis (TB), a potentially serious infectious bacterial disease that mainly affects the lungs, upon hire. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to assist residents in obtaining routine and 24-hour emergency dental care for 2 of 2 residents (Residents #2 and #20) reviewed for dental services. 1. The facility failed to assist in providing routine dental services for Resident #2 and Resident #20. This failure could place residents at risk of oral complications, dental pain, and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation. 1. The facility failed to ensure stored foods were properly stored, labeled, and dated. 2. The facility failed to ensure food items remained covered prior to food service. 3. The facility failed to ensure the refrigerator's thermometers reflected similar temperatures. 4. The facility failed to ensure expired food items were discarded by the expiration date. 5. The facility failed to maintain cleanliness in the kitchen. The dry storage had food particles on the shelves and the ice machine had a brown substance on the ice making mechanism. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive, person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and time frames to meet, attain, and/or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 3 of 4 residents reviewed for care plans (Residents #18, #28, #32). 1. Residents #18, #28, and #32 did not have care plans in place to address their need for Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP). 2. Resident #32 did not have a care plan in place to address her pressure ulcer. These failures could affect residents by placing them at risk of not receiving individualized care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for one (Resident #4) of 2 residents reviewed for incontinent care and 3 (Resident #18, #28, and #32) of 4 residents reviewed for Enhanced Barrier Protections (EBP) for infection control practices. 1. CNA B washed her hands then closed the faucet with her bare hands before providing personal care for Resident #4. CNA B also did not sanitize her hands in between glove change during personal care provided to Resident #4. 2. The facility failed to ensure Residents #18, #28, and #32 were identified for and implemented Enhanced Barrier Precautions related to pressure ulcers. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure the resident's had the right to be informed of the risks, and participate in, his or her treatment which included the right to be informed in advance, by the physician or other practitioner or professional, of the risks and benefits of proposed care, of treatment and treatment alternatives or treatment options and to choose the alternative or option he or she preferred, for 2 of 5 residents (Residents #14, Resident # 17) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to obtain informed consent based on information of the benefits, risks, and options available from Resident #14's or their Responsible Party for Mirtazapine, an antidepressant used to treat depression (a mood disorder that causes a persistent feeling of sadness or loss of interest) prior to administering the medication. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review the facility failed to electronically transmit within 14 days after the facility completed a resident's assessment, encoded MDS data including a subset of items upon a resident's quarterly MDS assessment for 1 (Residents #27) of 6 residents reviewed for electronic transmission of MDS data to the CMS system. The facility failed to transmit quarterly MDS data to the CMS system within 14 days of the completion of Resident #27's quarterly MDS Assessment. This failure could place residents at risk of not having specific information transmitted in a timely manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services including procedures that assure the accurate dispensing and administering of all drugs and biologicals to meet the needs of each resident for 1 (Residents #2) of 15 residents reviewed for pharmaceutical services. LVN A did not administer Resident #2's scheduled multivitamin with minerals as indicated by the physician orders. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving the therapeutic benefit of medications and under dosed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to have sufficient nursing staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial wellbeing for 5 (Residents #1, #2, #3, #4, and #5) of 10 residents reviewed for staffing concerns. 1. The facility failed to ensure there were sufficient staff per the facility assessment. 2. The facility failed to ensure there were sufficient staff to ensure Residents #1-#5 received their showers. This failure could place residents at risk of not getting needed care and services, a decrease in quality of care and quality of life and/or injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain all mechanical, electrical, and patient care Equipment in safe operating condition for 2 (Hot water heater #1 and #2) of 3 reviewed for essential equipment. The facility failed to repair or replace the hot water heater that supplied hot water for Halls 1, 2 and 3, 4 for days. This failure could place residents at risk for poor hygiene and health.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interview and record review, The facility failed to maintain complete and accurately documented medical records on 3 (Resident #3, #6, and #7) of 9 residents reviewed. The facility failed to have matching documentation of shower logs vs shower task in electronic system for Residents #3, #6, and #7. This failure could place residents at risk of not having proper hygiene. Findings Included: Resident #3 Record review of Resident #3's face sheet, dated 4/12/24, reflected an [AGE] year-old female with an admission date of 2/15/24. Resident #3 had a diagnosis which included Orthopedic aftercare, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and hypothyroidism. Record review of Resident #3's MDS dated [DATE] with a quarterly assessment dated [DATE] indicated BIMS of 7, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care, is provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, the residents' goals, and preferences for 2 of 5 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for respiratory care. Resident #1 and Resident #2 did not have physician's orders for oxygen administration. This deficient practice could affect the residents who received respiratory treatments and could result in residents receiving incorrect or inadequate oxygen support and could result in a decline in health.
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 disease and infections for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for infection control practices. CNA A failed to perform proper hand hygiene and glove changes while providing incontinence care to Resident #1. This failure could place residents at risk for the spread of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide food that accommodates resident's preferences for eight (Resident #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, and #8) of eight residents reviewed for food preferences and the accommodation of resident's meal choices. The facility kitchen failed to offer alternative meals for residents. This failure placed residents at risk for dissatisfaction, poor intake, weight loss and decline in health.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to be treated with dignity and respect for 2 (Resident #6 and Resident #8) of 3 residents who were reviewed for rights. For Resident #6 and Resident #8, the facility failed to move the residents' personal possessions when the residents were moved to a different room when the ceiling leaked. This failure placed the residents' property at risk for being lost, stolen, or damaged and could cause them worry and distress.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure 2 of 3 (Resident #6 and Resident #8) residents reviewed for rights, received written notice prior to room change. The facility failed to ensure Resident #6, and Resident #8 received written notice, or the responsible person was contacted prior to room change. The facility failure could place the residents at risk of decreased quality of life due to a change in living environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, staff, and the public on 2 of 4 halls (hall 1 and hall 4) and the 1 of 1 dining room reviewed for environmental conditions. 1. The facility failed to repair room [ROOM NUMBER] on Hall 1 that had severe water damage to the ceiling. 2. The facility failed to repair room [ROOM NUMBER] on Hall 4 that had severe water damage where the ceiling had fallen and caved in. 3. The facility failed to maintain the ice machine in the dining room to prevent water damage to the floor and mineral deposits to form on the outside of the machine. These failures could place residents at risk of being in an unsafe environment, a decrease in quality of life and self-worth.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure the resident's had the right to be informed of the risks, and participate in, his or her treatment which included the right to be informed in advance, by the physician or other practitioner or professional, of the risks and benefits of proposed care, of treatment and treatment alternatives or treatment options and to choose the alternative or option he or she preferred, for 6 of 32 residents (Resident #7, Resident #18, Resident #20, Resident #21, Resident #23, and Resident #28) reviewed for resident rights . [...]
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 time frames to meet, attain, and/or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 4 of 15 residents (Residents #18 #19, #21 and #29) reviewed for care plans in that: Resident #18 did not have a care plan to address his diuretic use. Resident #19 did not have a care plan for needs related to Parkinson's Disease (progressive disease of nervous system causing tremors, muscle stiffness, and slow imprecise movements). Resident #21 did not have a care plan to address his antipsychotic use or his antianxiety use. Resident #29 did not have a care plan to address his dietary preference of being a Vegetarian or signs and symptoms of delirium. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services, including procedures that ensure the accurate administering of all drugs to meet the needs of the residents, for 1 of 1 medication rooms (indicate which med room) inspected for medication storage, for 1 of 1 treatment carts (which med cart) inspected for medication storage, and for 1 of 31 residents reviewed for pharmacy services (Residents # 29) during review of medication carts. The facility failed to ensure the Review of the medication room revealed: opened and undated vials of influenza vaccine. Review of the wound care/ treatment cart revealed: Review of the medication cart revealed: expired medications in cart This failure could place residents at risk of receiving medications that were expired and not produce the desired effect.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that each resident's drug regimen was free from psychotropic drugs unless the medication was necessary to treat a specific condition as diagnosed and documented in the clinical record for two (Resident #18 and #21) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Resident #18 was prescribed the antipsychotic Haloperidol for anxiety or restlessness. Resident #18 was prescribed the antipsychotic Haloperidol and the anti-anxiety Lorazepam as needed for greater than 14 consecutive days without the review of the prescribing doctor. Resident #21 was prescribed an anti-anxiety/antipsychotic medication diazepam/ Haloperidol gel for treatment of agitation, and the antipsychotic quetiapine for dementia. [...]
14 fire safety citations on file: 6 on September 4, 2025, 5 on August 22, 2024, 3 on July 13, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| August 22, 2024 | Fine | $10,527 |
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) | 3.33 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.49 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.92 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.77 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.06 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 45.7% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | not reported | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.35 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 3.49 on weekdays and 2.92 on weekends, 16% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 3.6% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 4.32 in April to June 2025 to 3.33 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 | 3.33 | 0.49 | 3.49 | 2.92 | 3.6% | 0 of 90 | 38 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.78 | 0.51 | 3.96 | 3.32 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 34 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.26 | 0.54 | 4.49 | 3.69 | 2.9% | 2 of 92 | 31 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.32 | 0.43 | 4.54 | 3.76 | 0.3% | 0 of 91 | 32 |
| 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 | 11.0 | 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 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.5 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.6 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.5 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.3 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 16.9 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 24.8 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.5 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.1 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Brady West Rehab & Nursing's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (38.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
38.6% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Texas: 116 better, 50 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 27 eligible stays.
12.4% 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. 42 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
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. 22 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
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. 16 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. 23 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. 23 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality 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. 6 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: BAYLOR COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT. CMS links this home to Ruby Healthcare, a group of 7 nursing homes averaging 3 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Barham, Maritia | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 06/01/2023 | |
| Hardin, Leslie | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/01/2023 | |
| Brady SNF, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 06/01/2023 | |
| Silberstein, Ari | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 06/01/2023 |
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.