1034 Liberty Park Dr, Austin, TX 78746 · Travis County · (512) 328-3775
90 certified beds, about 59 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare since 1990
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 455866 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on April 9, 2026, inspectors cited 6 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 30 health citations since November 2023, 5 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (4 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 5 fines totaling $72,833 in the last three years; the largest was $33,758, and the latest is dated May 1, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 4.46 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.67 of those hours.
35.7% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Brookdale Senior Living, an affiliated group of 12 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 30 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to have a person-centered care plan developed and implemented to meet each resident's preferences and goals, and address the resident's medical, physical, mental, and psychosocial needs for three of (52, 67, and 73) eight residents reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident # 67's initial care plan was completed upon admission to reflect Resident #67's need for treatments, such as TPN-Total Parental Nutrition (a method of delivering essential nutrients-carbohydrates, proteins, fats, electrolytes, vitamins, and minerals-directly into the bloodstream via a central vein catheter, bypassing the digestive system. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, the facility failed to ensure storage of medications used in the facility in accordance with currently accepted professional principles and included the appropriate expiration dates to preserve their integrity for the stored medications, and to store medications properly to prevent deterioration for two medications carts out of four and two nursing carts out of 4 reviewed for medications storage. The facility failed to ensure that the MC-D (hall 200) did not have 1 medication bottle that was undated in the drawer. The facility failed to ensure that the MC-D (hall 200) did not have 7 medication bottles that were labeled incorrectly. The facility failed to ensure that the MC-D (hall 200) did not have 1 white round TAB inside of unlabeled medication cup. [...]
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 2 (Resident #41 and Resident #48) of 7 residents reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure MA D performed hand hygiene before and after administering medications to Resident #55 and Resident #48. The facility failed to ensure LVN B performed hand hygiene before going to Resident #55 room. These failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination and the spread of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all residents had the right to formulate an advance directive for 2 (Resident #52 and Resident #73) of 10 residents reviewed for advance directives. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #52's advanced directives were clearly identified, documented in the resident's electronic medical record, and on the residents' care plan.2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #73's advanced directives were clearly identified, documented in the resident's electronic medical record, and on the residents' care plan. This failure could place residents at risk of not having their end-of-life wishes honored and having incomplete records.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that each resident's drug regimen was free from unnecessary drugs for one of 10 residents, (Residents #67), reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility failed to ensure Resident #67 had an indication/diagnosis for an antibiotic ordered. Resident #67 was receiving Ciprofloxacin HCl Tablet 500 MG without appropriate diagnoses. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the appropriate interventions, monitoring, and follow-ups. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure its residents were free of any significant medication errors for 1 (Resident #55) of 3 residents observed and reviewed for medications administration. The facility failed to ensure that MA D did not inaccurately chart two refused medications as administered to Resident # 55. These failures placed the residents at risk of harm or not receiving desired outcomes from medications not administered according to physician's orders and manufacturer's specifications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that each resident has a right to secure and confidential personal and clinical records for one (Resident #2) out of 16 residents LVN B was providing care for on 12/03/2024. A. Resident #2's personal health information was left on the unlocked computer screen at the nursing station by LVN B. This failure could result in Resident #2's personal information being exposed to unauthorized individuals. This problem had the potential to affect all 16 residents in care of LVN B on 12/3/2025.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe and sanitary environment to prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 2 (Resident #1, Resident #2) of 7 residents reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to properly use EBP personal protective equipment during wound care for Resident #1 and Resident #2.2. The facility failed to follow hand hygiene procedure during direct care for Resident #1. This failure could place residents at risk for infection transmission, sepsis, and hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for two of two medication rooms (second floor and third floor medication rooms) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure the second and third floor medication rooms did not contain expired supplies. These failures could place residents at risk of receiving inadequate treatments or results or ingesting medications for which they were not prescribed.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that the resident has the right to be informed of, and participate in, his or her treatment, including the right to be informed in advance 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 prefers for 2 (Residents #8 and #10) of 6 residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. 1. The facility failed to obtain signed consent prior to administering psychotropic medication Depakote for Resident #8. 2. The facility failed to obtain signed consent prior to administering psychotropic medications Trazodone, Depakote, and Seroquel for Resident #10. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents received services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #24) who were observed for call light placement. The facility failed to ensure the call light was within reach for Resident #24. This deficient practice could affect any resident and keep them from calling for help as needed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for 1 of 1 medication rooms ( third floor medication room) and one of four medication carts (third floor Hall E medication aide cart) assessed for drug storage and labeling, as evidenced by: The facility failed to ensure all medications located inside the third floor Hall E medication aide cart were properly labeled. These failures could place residents at risk of receiving inadequate treatments or results or ingesting medications for which they were not prescribed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and record review, the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. 1. The facility failed to maintain refrigerated storage area free of contaminants and store food off flooring. 2. The facility failed to discard food items that were beyond labeled use-by date. 3. The facility failed to label food items with use-by date and date items were opened. 4. The facility failed to ensure items in the freezer were covered. These failures could place residents at risk for food contamination and foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention 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 2 of 4 residents (Resident#40 and Resident #10) reviewed for infection control related to isolation precautions. 1. The facility failed to ensure isolation precaution signage and personal protective equipment (PPE) were in place for Resident #40 who had been identified as requiring enhanced barrier precautions (EBP). 2. The facility failed to ensure CNA A utilized isolation precautions, including PPE and hand hygiene, for Resident #10, who had been identified as requiring contact precautions. These failures could result in the spread of infection to other residents and staff.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that residents receive treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices for one (Resident #1) of four residents reviewed for falls. The facility failed to conduct neurological assessments on Resident #1 per facility protocol after Resident #1 returned from the hospital the same day of her unwitnessed fall at the facility. This failure could place residents at risk of a change in condition and not receiving proper treatment and care in a timely manner.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement an effective discharge planning process that focused on the resident's discharge goals, the preparation of residents to be active partners and effectively transition them to post-discharge care, and the reduction of factors leading to preventable readmissions for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for discharges. The facility failed to have a wheelchair and assistant services set up upon Resident #1's discharge to her apartment. She was unable to transfer herself and was found by EMS over 24 hours later laying in the same spot without access to food or water. This failure resulted in an identification of an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on 04/29/24 at 2:00 PM and an IJ template was provided to the ADM. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as is possible and that each resident received adequate supervision to prevent accidents for 1 (Resident #11) of 6 residents reviewed for accidents. The facility failed to ensure that the water used to prepare hot beverages for residents was maintained at a temperature appropriate to prevent scalding and burns. Water temperatures were taken on 01/24/24 from the coffee machine hot water Bunn dispenser the water temperature was 188 degrees Fahrenheit. On 09/12/23, Resident #11 spilled hot tea on herself, and she sustained a second degree burn to her right hip, which required wound care. An Immediate Jeopardy was identified on 01/25/24 at 11:50 AM. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in 1 of 1 kitchen; specifically, the facility failed to ensure dishware were appropriately sanitized. The facility failed to ensure the dishwasher reached minimum wash and rinse temperatures of 140 degrees to wash and 180 degrees or final rinse. This failure could place residents at risk for food contamination and food borne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews 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 3 of 9 sharps containers, and 1 of 6 staff (CNA D) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to monitor sharps containers to prevent them from being over filled. 2. The facility failed to ensure CNA D disinfected the blood pressure cuff in between blood pressure checks for Residents #32, #34, #42 and #45. These findings could result in residents being exposed to infections and bloodborne pathogens.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to equip rooms to assure full visual privacy for each resident in 5 of 16 rooms reviewed for privacy. The facility failed to install curtains to ensure the residents in the A bed would have full visual privacy when needed. This failure could cause the resident to be exposed to anyone entering the room during cares.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement written policies to prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation for 1 of 6 (Resident #11) residents reviewed for neglect. Resident #11 sustained a second degree burn after spilling hot tea on herself which required wound care from 09/13/23-11/29/23 and the facility failed to report the incident to the State Survey Agency. This failure could place the resident at risk for unreported allegations of abuse, neglect, and injuries of unknown origin.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, which included injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, were reported immediately, but no later than 2 hours after the allegation was made, if the events that caused the allegation involved abuse or resulted in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that caused the allegation did not involve abuse and did not result in serious bodily injury, to the administrator of the facility and to other officials, which included the state survey agency, in accordance with State law through established procedures for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #11) reviewed for abuse and neglect. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission for 2 of 6 residents (Resident #4 and Resident #209) reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility failed to ensure Residents #4 and Resident #209 had a baseline care plan, or conversely a comprehensive care plan, within 48 hours of admission. These failures could place the residents at risk of not having their needs and preferences met.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who enters the facility with a colostomy receive such care consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #209) reviewed for colostomies. The facility failed to have physician orders and a care plan for Resident #209's colostomy. These findings place resident at risk of complications related to a colostomy.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was fed by enteral means received appropriate treatment and services to restore, if possible, oral eating skills and to prevent complications of enteral feeding which included but not limited to aspiration, pneumonia, diarrhea, vomiting, dehydration, metabolic abnormalities and nasal-pharyngeal ulcers for one of four residents (Resident #221) reviewed for feeding tubes. The facility failed to follow physician's orders to change Resident #221's enteral feeding bag and tubing every 24 hours to provide with her 20 hours of feeding. This failure could place residents at risk for a decline in health or adverse effects due to inappropriate management of enteral feeding care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received parenteral fluids administered consistent with professional standards of practice and in accordance with physician orders for 1 of 2 resident (Resident #156) reviewed for peripheral intravenous care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #156's PICC line dressing was dated on 01/20/24. This failure placed residents at risk of developing an infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #4) reviewed for oxygen. 1. The facility failed to have physician orders for oxygen use. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4's concentrator and nasal cannula was with changed out on a weekly basis. This failure could place residents who received oxygen therapy at risk for inadequate or inappropriate amounts of oxygen delivery and possible infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice for one 1 (Resident #1) of 6 residents reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to follow physician orders for Resident #1 to monitor blood pressure and blood sugars after a medication error was discovered and resident had to be sent to the emergency department. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) existed from [DATE] - [DATE]. The IJ was determined to be at past noncompliance as the facility had implemented actions that corrected the noncompliance prior to the beginning of the investigation. These failures placed the resident at risk of not receiving adequate care and services, and decreased quality of life. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of significant medications errors for one of five residents (Resident #1) reviewed for any significant medication errors, in that: The facility gave Resident #1 medications belonging to another patient on 12/3/2023 and 12/4/2023 resulting in Resident #1 blood sugar dropping and being transferred to the emergency department. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) existed from 12/03/23 - 12/05/23. The IJ was determined to be at past noncompliance as the facility had implemented actions that corrected the noncompliance prior to the beginning of the investigation. This failure placed residents at risk of experiencing non-therapeutic side effects from medications which could cause injury and/or death.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility has failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible and the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 3 residents (Residents #1) reviewed for accidents and supervision. Facility staff failed to ensure Resident #1's wheelchair was in the locked position during a transfer, causing a fall on 8/28/23 which resulted in fractures to the pubic bone and femur. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The noncompliance began on 8/29/23 and ended on 9/3/23. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place residents at risk of injury from accidents and hazards.
11 fire safety citations on file: 1 on April 9, 2026, 3 on February 14, 2025, 7 on January 26, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| May 1, 2024 | Fine | $7,800 |
| January 26, 2024 | Fine | $33,758 |
| December 29, 2023 | Fine | $7,446 |
| December 29, 2023 | Fine | $14,518 |
| November 5, 2023 | Fine | $9,311 |
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) | 4.46 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.67 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.81 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.61 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.18 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 35.7% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 63.6% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 4.15 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 4.72 on weekdays and 3.81 on weekends, 19% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.8% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 4.53 in April to June 2025 to 4.46 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 | 4.46 | 0.67 | 4.72 | 3.81 | 0.8% | 0 of 90 | 59 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 4.79 | 0.76 | 4.97 | 4.35 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 48 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.74 | 0.70 | 4.98 | 4.13 | 0.0% | 5 of 92 | 51 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.53 | 0.69 | 4.76 | 3.95 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 63 |
| 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 | 14.9 | 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 | 5.4 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.8 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.0 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.3 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 21.3 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 7.9 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Brookdale Westlake Hills's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (60.5% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
60.5% this home
Better 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. 371 eligible stays.
12.1% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Texas: 0 better, 9 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 390 eligible stays.
5.9% 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. 197 eligible stays.
56.0% 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. 150 residents counted.
0.5% 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. 211 residents counted.
2.4% 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. 211 residents counted.
91.7% 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. 133 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: FORT AUSTIN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP. CMS links this home to Brookdale Senior Living, a group of 12 nursing homes averaging 3.4 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| American Retirement Corporation | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 01/01/2003 | |
| Arcpi Holdings Inc | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 12/16/2002 | |
| Brookdale Senior Living Inc | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 06/28/2005 | |
| Kussow, Dawn | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 04/30/2025 | |
| White, Chadwick | Indirect ownership interest | Individual | 04/30/2025 | |
| Stengle, Nikolas | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 11/08/2025 | |
| White, Chadwick | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 03/09/2018 | |
| Baier, Lucinda | Corporate director | Individual | 03/09/2018 | |
| Bowman, Kevin | Corporate director | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| White, Chadwick | Corporate director | Individual | 03/09/2018 | |
| Baier, Lucinda | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/01/2016 | |
| Bowman, Kevin | Corporate officer | Individual | 10/01/2021 | |
| La Marre, Kevin | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/22/2017 | |
| Munoz, Anna | Corporate officer | Individual | 02/15/2024 | |
| White, Chadwick | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/09/2018 | |
| Bertrand, Brandi | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/22/2025 | |
| David-Rosen, Carol | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/22/2025 | |
| Fry, Liam | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/22/2025 | |
| Kussow, Dawn | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/23/2024 | |
| La Marre, Kevin | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/22/2017 | |
| Mackenzie, Todd | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/22/2025 | |
| Munoz, Anna | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/15/2024 | |
| Odanga, Catherine | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/22/2025 | |
| White, Chadwick | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/09/2018 | |
| Arc Fort Austin Properties LLC | Limited partnership interest | Organization | 12/13/2002 | |
| Arcpi Holdings Inc | Limited partnership interest | Organization | 12/16/2002 | |
| La Marre, Kevin | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 09/12/2025 | |
| Lbmc PC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/01/2024 | |
| Ohi Asset (az) Tucson-7500 North Calle Sin Envidia LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/20/2021 | |
| Ohi Asset Hud Sf Ca LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/20/2021 | |
| Ohi Healthcare Properties Limited Partnership | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/20/2021 | |
| Omega Healthcare Investors Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/20/2021 | |
| Walters Financial Services Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/22/2025 | |
| Asher, Jordan | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/24/2020 | |
| Bertrand, Brandi | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/10/2025 | |
| Drayton, Claudia | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/18/2024 | |
| Fioravanti, Mark | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/13/2025 | |
| Freed, Victoria | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/29/2019 | |
| Fry, Liam | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/10/2025 | |
| Hausman, Joshua | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/24/2025 | |
| Mace, Elizabeth | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/18/2024 | |
| Warren, Denise | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/04/2018 | |
| Wielansky, Lee | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/23/2015 |
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.