4400 Walnut St., Greenville, TX 75401 · Hunt County · (903) 455-8729
120 certified beds, about 84 residents a day · Government - Hospital district · Medicare and Medicaid since 1997
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 675666 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on February 11, 2026, inspectors cited 6 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 38 health citations since September 2023, 3 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (3 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $40,076 in the last three years; the largest was $25,175, and the latest is dated March 27, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.39 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.31 of those hours.
22.2% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
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 38 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to develop and implement written policies and procedures that prohibited and prevented abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents and misappropriation of resident property for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to implement their abuse policy when CNA B and the ADON failed to report an allegation of abuse reported to them by Resident #2 regarding CNA A mistreating her and Resident #1 on 04/01/2026. This failure could place residents at risk of unreported abuse, neglect, exploitation, and a decreased quality of life.
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, if the events that caused the allegation involved abuse, for 2 of 3 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for abuse and neglect reporting. The facility failed to ensure CNA B and the ADON reported an allegation of abuse to the Administrator immediately when Resident #2 reported to them CNA A mistreated her and Resident #1 on 04/01/2026. 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 each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility failed to ensure CNA A performed a proper transfer, when she grabbed Resident #1 from the pants to transfer her from her wheelchair to her bed and did not use a gait belt on 04/01/2026. This failure could place residents at risk for falls, injuries, and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were free from significant medication errors for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for significant medication errors, in that: The facility administered the incorrect insulin on 03/12/2026 based on a failed medication reconciliation upon Resident #1's readmission resulting in a low blood glucose reading of 35. The facility should have administered Insulin Glargine (a long acting medication use to treat diabetes mellitus and help regulate blood glucose levels) 12 units daily and incorrectly administered Tresiba (an ultra-long-acting insulin). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to develop a person-centered comprehensive care plan to address medical needs for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4's comprehensive care plan was revised to reflect current transfer status of requiring a mechanical lift. This failure could place residents at increased risk of falls, injuries, and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents' environment remains as free of accident hazards as possible for 2 of 20 residents reviewed for quality of care. (Resident # 4 and Resident # 64)The facility failed to remove worn and damaged mechanical lift slings from service for Resident's # 4 and # 64. This failure could result in a loss of quality of life due to injuries.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who is incontinent of bladder receives appropriate treatment and services to prevent infections and to restore continence to the extent possible for 1 of 5 (Resident #72) residents observed for incontinent care. CNA D and CNA F did not provide proper incontinent care for Resident #72 and wiped from the anal area toward the urethral area (back to front) on 2/10/2026. This failure could place residents at risk for bacterial infections from improper incontinent care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services, including procedures that ensure accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing and administering of medications for 2 of 6 residents (Residents # 27 and # 62) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to remove Resident # 27's expired lorazepam concentrate (anxiety medication) from the medication room refrigerator. The facility failed to remove Resident #62's expired ondansetron (nausea medication) from the medication cart. These failures could place residents who receive medications at risk of not receiving the intended therapeutic benefit of the medications, decreased quality of life, and hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure drugs and biological's used in the facility were labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles and the expiration date when applicable for 1 of 4 medication carts (A hall nurse medication cart) reviewed for labeling and storage, in that:The facility failed to label over the counter (OTC) eye drops with the name of the specific resident it was ordered for on [DATE]. This failure could place residents who receive medications to have adverse reactions or cross contamination.
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 1 of 7 residents (Resident #72) reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure CNA D and CNA F followed contact precautions when incontinent care was provided to Resident #72 on 2/10/2026. These failures could place residents at risk of exposure to infectious diseases due to improper infection control practices.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that are complete and accurately documented for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 resident reviewed for resident records. The facility failed to reflect that Resident # 1 presented with alterations in skin integrity on daily Skilled Evaluation forms. This failure placed residents at risk of having inaccurate assessments to include those with alterations in skin integrity, that could lead to residents not receiving care as needed due to inaccurate medical records.
Inspectors wroteBased on 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 3 (Resident #1) resident reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to immediately implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for Resident #1 when she admitted on [DATE]. These deficient practices placed residents at risk for cross contamination and spread of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program so that the facility was free of pests and rodents for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pest control. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's room remained free from ants. Resident #1 had ants in her bed on 07/27/25. This failure could place residents at risk of injury or infection related to ant bites, unsanitary environment, and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, 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 4 of 24 residents (Residents #90, Resident #95, Resident #203, Resident #98) reviewed for care plans. 1. The facility failed to include Resident #90's diagnosis and interventions for the medication Eliquis Oral Tablet 2.5 MG (Apixaban) (an anticoagulant used for preventing coagulation of blood) in his comprehensive care plan. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #95's diagnosis of Clostridioides difficile also known as C-diff (a very contagious bacterium that can cause diarrhea and colitis) and precautions was on her care plan. 3. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that the comprehensive care plans were reviewed and revised by the interdisciplinary team after each assessment, for 3 residents (Resident #90, Resident #203, and Resident #8) out of 24 sampled residents whose care plans were reviewed for timing and revision. The facility failed to ensure Resident #90's care plan was updated and accurate by not resolving the care plan for a PICC line and antibiotic administration that resident no longer had an order for. The facility failed to ensure Resident #203's care plan was updated by resolving her melatonin and rash in which she no longer had those orders. The facility failed to ensure Resident #8's care plan was updated by resolving her antibiotics and IV fluids in which she no longer had those orders. [...]
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 reviewed for 7 of 24 residents (Resident's#95, #203, #64, #20, #21, #74, #98) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA F, LVN C, and therapist E were following contact isolation for Resident #95 who had Clostridium difficile, also known as C-diff (a very contagious bacterium that can cause diarrhea and colitis). 2. The facility failed to ensure the treatment nurse performed hand hygiene while performing wound care, and CNA B was following Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for Resident #203 who had wounds. 3. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and provide care in a manner that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 2 of 24 residents (Resident #20 and Resident #74) reviewed for resident rights. The facility did not ensure Laundry Aide N knocked, introduced herself, and explained what she was doing prior to entering Resident #20's and Resident #74's room. This failure could place residents at risk for diminished quality of life, loss of dignity and loss of self-worth.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences for 1 of 24 residents (Resident #65) reviewed for accommodation of needs. The facility treatment nurse failed to ensure Resident #65's call light was in reach for her to use when assistance was needed on 11/17/24-11/19/24. This failure could have placed resident at risk of having needs gone unmet. Findings Included: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, personal and oral hygiene for 1 of 24 residents (Resident #59) reviewed for ADL (activities of daily living) care. The facility failed to provide nail care by removing black material from under fingernails for dependent female Resident #59 on 11/17/2024,11/18/2024, and 11/19/2024. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible for 1 of 24 Residents (Resident #98) reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility failed to ensure Resident #98's fall mat was beside his bed on 11/17/24, 11/18/24 and 11/19/24. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of harm or injury and contribute to avoidable accidents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needed respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences for 1 of 3 residents (Resident's #205) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to date and follow the physician's order to change oxygen tubing weekly on Saturday nights for Resident #205. This failure could place residents who receive respiratory care at risk of developing respiratory complications and a decreased quality of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments under proper temperature controls and permit only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for 1 medication cart (Hall 100 medication cart) of 5 medication carts. The facility failed to ensure LVN R the 100 Hall medication cart was locked when it was left unattended in the hallway with the door closed while he provided a treatment for a resident. This failure could place residents at risk for overdose or injury from sharp needles.
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 reviewed for food and nutrition services. 1. The facility failed to ensure hair restraints were worn appropriately by dietary staff. 2. The facility failed to ensure the interior of the microwave was free of brown debris. These failures could place residents at risk for 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 and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 3 staff (Treatment Nurse) viewed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure the Treatment Nurse performed changed gloves and performed hand hygiene after moving a dirty napkin from the bedside table, picking oxygen tubing up out of the floor, and before starting wound care. These failures could place residents and staff at risk for cross-contamination, spread of infection and could potentially affect all others in the building. Findings Include: During an observation on 4/23/24 at 8:51 a.m. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident who is incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for 3 of 3 residents (Resident #43, #391, #20) reviewed for treatment of urinary tract infections and 3 of 4 residents (Resident #12, #66, and #2) reviewed for incontinent care. 1. Resident #43 was admitted to the hospital on [DATE] with septic shock related to a urinary tract infection. 2. Resident #391 was admitted to the hospital on [DATE] with a diagnosis of sepsis related to a urinary tract infection. 3. Resident #20 was admitted to the hospital on [DATE] with a diagnosis of urinary tract infection. 4. CNA M failed to clean the foley catheter tubing during foley catheter care for Resident #12 who currently had a urinary tract infection. 5. [...]
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 and sanitary environment and to help prevent the development hospitalizations for 3 of 3 residents (Resident #'s 43, 391, and 20) reviewed for infection control practices related to hospitalized residents with urinary tract infections resulting from E coli, 3 of 6 facility staff members (CNA 's M,P, V) reviewed for infection control practices related to incontinent care and foley catheter care, the provision of antibiotic stewardship for 1 of 1 residents (Resident #191) receiving hospice services and tracking and trending of organisms causing 28 urinary tract infections in July 2023 and 19 urinary tract infections in August 2023. 1. [...]
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: *food items were dated and sealed appropriately. *expired food items were discarded. *a dented can was stored separately. *the can opener was clean. *the pantry was clean. *Hydrion test strips (test strips used to measure the concentration of chemicals in sanitizing solution) were not expired. *the dishwasher reached 120 F. These failures could place residents at risk for foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to send and receive mail, and to receive letters, packages, and other materials delivered to the facility for the resident through the means other than a postal service for 8 of 8 confidential residents reviewed for weekend mail delivery. The facility failed to ensure residents received their mail on the weekend. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving mail in a timely manner that could result in a decline in resident's psychosocial well-being and quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to implement written policies and procedures to prohibit and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation for 5 of 22 employees (DON, ADON, Dietician, Social Worker and Housekeeping Supervisor) reviewed for freedom from abuse, neglect, and exploitation . The facility failed to ensure the Human Resource (HR) Coordinator completed an Employee Misconduct Registry (EMR) check annually for the for the DON, ADON, Dietician, Social Worker. This failure could place residents at risk for abuse, neglect, exploitation, and misappropriation of property.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assess the residents for risk of entrapment from bed rails prior to installation, review the risks and benefits of bed rails with the resident or resident representative and obtain informed consent prior to installation of bed rails for 3 of 3 residents (Resident #78, Resident #36, Resident #2) reviewed for bed rails. The facility failed to ensure Resident #78, Resident #36, and Resident #2 had assessments or informed consents for the use of bed rails. This failure could place the residents at risk for entrapment, injury, or harm.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident was informed before, or at the time of admission, and periodically during the residents stay, of services available in the facility and of changes for those services, which included changes for services not covered under Medicare/Medicaid or by the facility's per diem rate for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #190) reviewed for Medicare/Medicaid coverage. The facility failed to ensure Resident #190 was given a SNF ABN when discharged from skilled services at the facility prior to covered days being exhausted. This failure could place residents at risk for not being aware of changes to provided services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, sanitary, comfortable, and homelike environment for 1 of 1 of 21 (Resident #29) resident reviewed for environment. The facility failed to replace Resident #29's over the bed light bulb when burned out. The facility failed to ensure Resident #29's light cover was covering the fluorescent light bulbs in the over the bed lighting. These failures could potenially cause a skin injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected the resident status for 3 of 21 residents (Resident #49, Resident #84, and Resident #61) reviewed for MDS assessment accuracy. 1. The facility inaccurately coded Resident #49 having a foley catheter on his admission MDS assessment. 2. The facility did not ensure Resident #84's admission MDS identified a medication as an anti-platelet instead of an anticoagulant. 3. The facility did not acccurately code Resident #61 receiving hospice services on her admission MDS assessment. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights, that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 2 of 21 residents (Resident #49 and Resident #36) reviewed for comprehensive person-centered care plans. 1. The facility failed to develop a care plan for Resident # 49's urostomy (surgical procedure that creates a stoma (artificial opening) for the urinary system). 2. The facility failed to care plan Resident #36's side rails. These failures could place residents at risk for unmet care needs and decreased quality of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure necessary services to maintain grooming and personal hygiene were provided for 1 of 21 residents (Resident #32) reviewed for ADLs. 1. The facility failed to provide assistance with facial hair removal for Resident #32. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #32 received her shower as scheduled. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving services and care, and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents requiring respiratory care were provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practices for 1 of 87 residents (Resident #73) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #73's oxygen was administered at 2.5 liters per minute via nasal cannula as prescribed by the physician. This failure could place residents who receive respiratory care at risk for developing respiratory complications.
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 for 1 (Resident #84) of 21 residents reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility did not ensure Resident #84 amlodipine (blood pressure medication) and lisinopril (blood pressure medication) was held when her blood pressure was outside of parameters. This failure could place the resident at risk of low blood pressure, dizziness, or fall.
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 1 resident (Resident #61) reviewed for hospice services. The facility did not ensure Resident #61's hospice records were a part of their records in the facility. This failure 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.
3 fire safety citations on file: 3 on February 11, 2026.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| March 27, 2026 | Fine | $14,901 |
| September 21, 2023 | Fine | $25,175 |
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) | 3.39 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.31 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.99 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.03 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.05 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 22.2% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 57.1% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.09 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 3.55 on weekdays and 2.99 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 3.33 in April to June 2025 to 3.39 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 | 3.39 | 0.31 | 3.55 | 2.99 | 3.6% | 0 of 90 | 84 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.35 | 0.25 | 3.48 | 3.01 | 3.3% | 0 of 92 | 86 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.37 | 0.23 | 3.53 | 2.97 | 3.5% | 0 of 92 | 94 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.33 | 0.15 | 3.49 | 2.93 | 4.3% | 0 of 91 | 99 |
| 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 | 8.0 | 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 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.3 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.4 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 11.9 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.6 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.3 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 23.0 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 10.8 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.1 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 0.6 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Briarcliff Health Center of Greenville's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (49.2% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
49.2% 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. 238 eligible stays.
10.3% 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. 235 eligible stays.
8.4% 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. 167 eligible stays.
66.7% 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. 87 residents counted.
1.3% 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. 152 residents counted.
1.4% 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. 152 residents counted.
100.0% this home
Median of homes: Texas98.5% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 42 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: STEPHENS MEMORIAL HOSPITAL DISTRICT.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stephens Memorial Hospital District | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 12/01/2023 |
| Bauder Family Investments, LLC | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 12/01/2023 | |
| Boulware St. James LLC | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 12/01/2023 | |
| Bauder, Kelly | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Bauder, Madison | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Boulware, Douglas | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Boulware, Sandra | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Boulware, Steven | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Boulware, Thomas | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Walker, Katie | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Bauder, Parker | 5% or greater security interest | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Easley, James | Corporate officer | Individual | 12/02/2024 | |
| Pmg Opco - Greenville LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 12/01/2023 | |
| Bauder, William | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Moore, Robin | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Bauder Family Investments, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/01/2023 | |
| Boulware St. James LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/01/2023 | |
| Bridgepointe Finanical Services, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/01/2023 | |
| Innovative Nurse Consulting, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/01/2023 | |
| Pmg Opco - Greenville LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/01/2023 | |
| Priority Management Group, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/01/2023 | |
| Progressive Rehab Solutions, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/01/2023 | |
| Steven Boulware Family Investments LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/01/2023 | |
| Bauder, Kelly | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Bauder, Madison | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Bauder, Parker | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Bauder, William | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Boulware, Douglas | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Boulware, Sandra | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Boulware, Steven | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Boulware, Thomas | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Moore, Robin | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Selvaggi, Richard | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Walker, Katie | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2023 |
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.