2885 Stillhouse Road, Paris, TX 75460 · Lamar County · (903) 784-4111
119 certified beds, about 76 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 2005
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 676045 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on July 29, 2026, inspectors cited 6 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 39 health citations since November 2023, 8 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (8 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $234,447 in the last three years; the largest was $234,447, and the latest is dated March 2, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.04 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.57 of those hours.
92.9% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Creative Solutions in Healthcare, an affiliated group of 149 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 39 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide sufficient number of nursing staff on a 24-hour basis to provide nursing care to all residents in accordance with resident care plans and the facility assessment for 1 of 1 facility reviewed for care and services. The facility failed to provide sufficient nursing staff on 07/04/2026, 07/05/2026, 07/08/2026, 07/11/2026, 07/12/2026, 07/14/2026, 07/16/2026, 07/19/2026, 07/25/2026, 07/26/2026, 07/27/2026. This failure placed residents at risk of inadequate supervision, an unsafe environment, and not receiving timely care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews, the facility failed to provide food that was palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature for 2 of 2 residents (Residents #44 and #89) and one lunch meal reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to ensure dietary staff provided food that was palatable and had an appetizing temperature on 07/28/2026. This failure could place residents at risk of decreased food intake, hunger, and unwanted weight loss.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were offered a therapeutic diet when there is a nutritional problem and the health care provider orders a therapeutic diet for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #56) reviewed for nutrition. The facility failed to ensure Resident #56 received her physician ordered supplement (magic cup) on 07/28/26 for her lunch meal. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance to ensure that the resident can use the assistive devices when consuming meals for 1 of 6 residents reviewed (Resident #46) for special eating equipment and assistance when consuming meals. The facility failed to provide Resident #46's physician ordered sip cup on 07/27/2026 during his lunch meal. This failure could place residents at risk for dehydration, diminished independence, and self-esteem.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to collaborate with hospice representatives and coordinate the hospice care planning process for each resident receiving hospice services, to ensure quality of care for the resident, ensuring communication with the hospice medical director, the resident's attending physician, and others participating in the provision of care for 1 of 4 (Resident #7) reviewed for hospice services. The facility failed to obtain Resident #7's Interdisciplinary Group Meetings since the start of care. These deficient practices could place residents who receive hospice services at risk of receiving inadequate end-of-life care due to a lack of documentation, coordination of care and communication of resident needs. Findings Included: [...]
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 1 of 4 residents (Resident#4) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA F did not use dirty linen and performed hand hygiene while providing incontinent care for Resident #4 on 07/28/26. This failure could place residents at risk for cross-contamination and the spread of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents with dementia received appropriate treatment and services to maintain their highest practicable well-being for 1 of 7 residents reviewed for dementia care. (Resident #1)The facility failed to ensure CNA A, NA B, and RN C provided appropriate dementia care and services while providing incontinent care for Resident #1 on 7/21/26. This failure could place residents with dementia at risk for increased behaviors and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide the necessary care and services in the area of hygiene, grooming, and incontinent care for 1 of 16 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for activities of daily living. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was provided with incontinent care every two hours as recommended for Resident #1, which resulted in bed linens being saturated with urine. This failure could result in pressure injuries, infection, psychosocial harm, and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and provide care in a manner that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure CNA A treated Resident #1 respectfully when he required assistance with his TV, and she failed to address him prior to exiting his room on 11/11/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of decreased self-worth, loss of dignity, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview 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 and determined that drug records were in order and that an account of all controlled drugs was maintained and periodically reconciled for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2's Qulipta (medication used to treat migraines) was administered as ordered on 10/31/2025, 11/01/2025, and 11/02/2025. This failure could place the residents at risk of not having medications available for use and medications errors.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #17 and Resident #54) reviewed for medication administration accuracy. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #17 received his blood sugar checks or insulin for 21 out of 31 days during May 2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #54 received his Metoprolol (used to treat heart condition, lowers blood pressure, reducing the risk of strokes and heart attacks) on 05/30/2025 at 4:00 p.m. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving the therapeutic effect of the medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled and stored in accordance with professional standards for 2 of 20 residents (Resident #129 and Resident #130) and 1 of 7 medication carts (400 hall Nurse Medication Cart) reviewed for drugs and biologicals. 1. The facility failed to ensure RN C secured the 400 hall Nurse Medication Cart, when she went in Resident #47's room to obtain his blood sugar on 06/02/25. 2. The facility did not ensure Resident #129's inhaler (a device that delivers medication directly into the lungs by inhaling it) was not left on her dresser. 3. The facility did not ensure Resident #130's nystatin cream (antifungal medication) was not left on her bedside table. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, 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 of 4 residents (Resident #76, Resident #54, and Resident #131) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA L performed hand hygiene while providing incontinent care for Resident #76 on 06/02/25. 2. The facility failed to ensure LVN D applied a gown when she administered an IV medication to Resident #131 on 06/03/25. 3. The facility failed to ensure LVN E applied a gown when she administered medications via a gastrostomy tube (feeding tube) to Resident #54 on 06/03/25. 4. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews 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 1 of 20 residents (Resident #68) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure Resident #68's representative was invited to participate in the development and review of Resident #68's care plan. This failure could place residents at risk of not having needs met by depriving them the opportunity to participate in the decision making regarding their care.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, observations, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse for 1 of 20 residents (Resident #47) reviewed for resident abuse. The facility did not ensure Resident #47 was free from abuse when Resident #4 hit Resident #47 in the head. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The past noncompliance began on 04/21/25 and ended on 04/24/25. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place residents at risk of abuse, physical harm, mental anguish, and emotional distress.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected the resident status for 1 of 20 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for MDS assessment accuracy. The facility did not ensure Resident #4's MDS assessment was accurately coded for PASRR (a preliminary assessment completed for all individuals before admission to a Medicaid-certified nursing facility to determine whether they might have a mental illness or intellectual disability). This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range and electrolyte balance, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrates that this was not possible or resident preferences indicate otherwise for 1 of 2 residents reviewed for nutritional status (Resident #54). The facility failed to ensure Resident #54's enteral feeding (a form of nutrition that was delivered into the digestive system as a liquid form via the feeding tube) was administered as ordered by the physician on 05/30/2025. This failure could place residents at risk for malnourishment, illness, skin breakdown, and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents who need respiratory care were provided such care consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 12 residents (Resident #132) reviewed for oxygen therapy. The facility failed to ensure Resident #132 had a physician's order in her chart for oxygen. This failure could place residents who receive respiratory care at risk for developing respiratory complications and a decreased quality of care. Findings Included: Record review of Resident #132's face sheet, dated 06/04/25, reflected Resident #132 was a [AGE] year-old female, admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a diagnosis which included COPD (chronic inflammatory lung disease that causes obstructed airflow from the lungs). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and provide care in a manner that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 4 of 5 residents (Resident #5, Resident #7, Resident #10, and Resident #58) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure CNA A treated Resident #5, Resident #7, Resident #10, and Resident #58 respectfully when she failed to speak to them while providing care. This failure could place residents at risk of embarrassment, feelings of worthlessness, decreased self-worth, loss of dignity, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to consider the views of a resident or family group and act promptly upon the grievances and recommendations of such groups concerning issues of resident care and life in the facility and failed to demonstrate their response and rationale for such response for 6 of 6 confidential residents reviewed for resident council. The facility failed to ensure there was documentation of the facility's efforts to resolve concerns about call light response times collected at the resident council meetings on 07/15/2024, 08/22/2024, and 09/20/2024. This failure could place residents at risk of not having their concerns and grievances followed through and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food safety in the facility's only kitchen. The facility failed to ensure: 1. The microwave was clean and free of food debris. 2. The deep fryer was clean and free of food debris. 3. Three sheet pans were free from encrusted black colored grease buildup coating on the outside and the inside surface. These failures could place residents at risk for foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the right to formulate an advanced directive for 1 of 20 residents (Residents #9) reviewed for advanced directives. The facility did not ensure Resident #9's OOH-DNR included the physician's printed name. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, 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 includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 24 (Resident #43) residents reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to update Resident #43's care plan after she no longer required a fall mat on last revision date 11/26/2024. This failure could place Resident # 43 at risk of not having their individualized needs met and a decreased quality of life. Findings Included: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure all drugs were stored in a locked compartment, only accessible by authorized personnel for 2 of 20 residents (Resident #34 and Resident #59) reviewed for medications at their bedside. 1. The facility failed to ensure the nebulizer medication for Resident #34 was not left at the bedside on 01/05/2025 and 01/06/2025. 2. The facility did not ensure Resident #59's Lamisil (medication used to treat fungal infections of the skin), Cortizone-10 (medication used to treat swelling, itching and redness of the skin), and Flonase (medication used to relieve seasonal and year-round allergic and non-allergic nasal symptoms) were properly safe and secured. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide liquids consistent with the resident's needs, for 1 of 23 (Resident #9) residents reviewed for liquid inconsistency. The facility did not ensure staff served Resident #9 her iced tea during her lunch meal on 01/05/25. This failure could place residents at risk for dehydration and loss of interest in eating.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide sufficient number of nursing staff on a 24-hour basis to provide nursing care to all residents in accordance with resident care plans and the facility assessment for 9 of 24 residents (Residents #9, #4, #41, #36, #44, #57, #130, #180, and #179 and 1 of 1 facility reviewed for care and services. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to be administered in a manner that enabled it to use its resources effectively and efficiently to maintain the highest practicable well-being of each resident for 1 of 1 facility reviewed for administration. The facility administration failed to ensure adequate staff were available and aware of job functions to provide for residents needs when the facility's Administrator position experienced 4 changes within 6 months. The facility failed to ensure the DON was aware that she was the abuse coordinator in absence of the Administrator, and she did not report, investigate or prevent further incidents of abuse per the facility's policy. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility to ensure the right of the residents to be free from abuse and neglect 7 of 11 residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. (Resident #'s 44, 55, 41, 47, 52, 179 and 36) The facility failed to ensure Resident #44 was protected from Resident #41 after an alleged resident to resident assault resulting in Resident 44 being sent to a local emergency. Resident #44 was assessed with a head contusion (bruise) and a hematoma (a collection of blood outside of the vessel) when she was left alone with her alleged assailant Resident #41. The facility failed to ensure Resident #55 was not left alone with Resident #41 after he allegedly assaulted Resident #44. The facility failed to ensure Resident #179 was not verbally and physically abused by CNA B. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement written policies and procedures that prohibit mistreatment, neglect, and abuse of residents, and misappropriation of resident property and establish policies and procedures to report and investigate such allegations for 8 of 11 residents (Resident #'s 44, 55, 41, 47, 52, 179, 57 and 36) reviewed for abuse and neglect. The facility failed to report and investigate when Resident #44 was found to have a large purple bruise to her inner thigh and a fractured hip. The facility failed to ensure Resident #44 was protected from Resident #41 after a resident to resident assault allegation resulting in Resident # 44 being sent to a local emergency room. Resident #44 was assessed with a head contusion (bruise) and a hematoma (a collection of blood outside of the vessel). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistive devices to prevent accidents for 4 of 11 residents (Resident #'s 4, 44, 130, and 180) reviewed for accidents. The facility failed to ensure Resident #44 was provided with adequate supervision when she was physically assaulted by Resident #41 on [DATE]. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4 who required 1 person assistance with toileting was provided adequate supervision to prevent an unwitnessed fall on [DATE] at 10:30 p.m. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4 was not left unsupervised on the toilet on [DATE] and was able to self-transfer between the toilet and the wheelchair. The facility failed to ensure Resident #130 was not provided adequate supervision to prevent an unwitnessed fall on [DATE] and [DATE]. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, observation, 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 9 of 24 residents (Resident #9, Resident #36, Resident #41, Resident #44, Resident #45, Resident #57, Resident #71, Resident #127 and Resident #179) and 1 of 1 medication storage room reviewed for pharmacy services. 1. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were free of any significant medication errors for 9 of 24 residents (Resident #9, Resident #36, Resident #41, Resident #44, Resident #45, Resident #57, Resident #71, Resident #127 and Resident #179) residents reviewed for medication errors. 1. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased interview, and record review the facility failed to have evidence alleged violations were thoroughly investigated to prevent further abuse for 1 of 11 residents (Resident #44) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to thoroughly investigate when Resident #44 was found to have a large bruise to her right inner thigh measuring 17 centimeters x approximately 11 centimeters that was painful on 6/21/2023. The facility failed to thoroughly investigate when Resident #44 was transferred to the local emergency room and found to have a new fracture and dislocation of the right trochanter (hip joint) on 6/21/2023. An IJ was identified on 3/01/2024. The IJ template was provided to the facility on 3/01/2024 at 11:05 a.m. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source were reported immediately, but no later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, for 5 of 11 residents (Resident #'s 44, 47, 52, 57, 179) reviewed for abuse and neglect reporting. The facility failed to report to the state agency when Resident #44's large bruise and fractured hip were found on 6/21/2024. The facility failed to report to the state agency when Resident #52 was cursed at and not allowed in his room by Resident #47 who had a history of verbal abuse. The DON was notified of this incident and failed to report the abuse. The facility failed to ensure the DON reported the abuse to HHSC within 2 hours, after LVN C reported abuse to her on 02/19/2024. [...]
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 help prevent the development and transmission of communicable disease and infections for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #53) reviewed for infection control practices. The facility failed to ensure CNA G performed hand hygiene and glove changes while providing incontinent care to Resident #53. These failures could place residents at risk for urinary tract infections, cross contamination, and the spread of infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that nurse aides were able to demonstrate competency in skills and techniques necessary to care for residents' needs for 4 (NA A, NA B, NA C, and Hospitality Aide D) of 4 staff reviewed for demonstration of skills and techniques necessary for residents' needs. The facility failed to conduct competency assessments for NA A, NA B, NA C, and Hospitality Aide D. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving the appropriate care and services to maintain their health and safety.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement written policies and procedures that prohibit mistreatment, neglect, and abuse of residents, for 4 of 20 residents (Resident's #1, #2, #3 and #4) reviewed for abuse. 1. The facility did not implement their policy on reporting abuse for a resident-to-resident altercation that occurred on 01/12/2024 between Resident #1 and Resident #2. 2. The facility did not implement their policy on reporting abuse for a resident-to-resident altercation that occurred on 11/25/2023 between Resident #3 and Resident #4. These deficient practices could place residents at risk for abuse, neglect, and not having their needs met.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation, or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source were reported immediately, but no later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, for 4 of 20 residents (Residents #1, #2, #3 and #4) reviewed for abuse and neglect. 1. The facility did not report the resident-to-resident altercation between Resident #1 and Resident #2 to the State Survey Agency within 2 hours of being notified. 2. The facility did not report the resident-to-resident altercation between Resident #3 and Resident #4 to the State Survey Agency within 2 hours of being notified. These failures to report could place the residents at risk for abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to maintain acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range and electrolyte balance, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrates that this is not possible or resident preferences indicate otherwise for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for nutritional status(Resident #1). The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 did not have a significant weight loss in 30 days. The facility failed to re-weigh Resident #1 after the Dietician recommended it on 10/21/23. This failure could place residents at risk for malnourishment, illness, skin breakdown, and decreased quality of life. Findings Include: [...]
8 fire safety citations on file: 4 on July 29, 2026, 2 on June 4, 2025, 2 on January 8, 2025.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| March 2, 2024 | Fine | $234,447 |
| March 2, 2024 | Payment Denial | 20 days from March 30, 2024 |
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) | 3.04 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.57 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.63 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.73 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.75 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 92.9% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 100.0% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.48 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 3.21 on weekdays and 2.63 on weekends, 18% 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 3.17 in April to June 2025 to 3.04 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 | 3.04 | 0.57 | 3.21 | 2.63 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 76 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.14 | 0.59 | 3.29 | 2.76 | 0.0% | 1 of 92 | 74 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.23 | 0.56 | 3.39 | 2.83 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 80 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.17 | 0.59 | 3.32 | 2.79 | 0.0% | 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.
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 | 18.6 | 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 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.5 | 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 | 13.7 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.5 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.7 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 31.1 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 23.2 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.6 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.8 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Brentwood Terrace Healthcare and Rehabilitation's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it worse than the national rate (39.4% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
39.4% this home
Worse 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. 64 eligible stays.
10.7% 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. 113 eligible stays.
9.3% 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. 58 eligible stays.
41.0% 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. 39 residents counted.
1.7% 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. 59 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. 59 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. 2 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: WEST WHARTON COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT. CMS links this home to Creative Solutions in Healthcare, a group of 149 nursing homes averaging 2.1 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Huggins, Linda | Corporate director | Individual | 02/01/2023 | |
| Mak, David | Corporate officer | Individual | 05/17/2021 | |
| Paris I Enterprises LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 02/01/2023 | |
| Blake, Gary | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/01/2023 | |
| Blake, Malisa | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/01/2023 |
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.