320 Lorenaly Dr, Brownsville, TX 78520 · Cameron County · (956) 350-2252
120 certified beds, about 99 residents a day · Non profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 2005
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 676083 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on August 12, 2025, inspectors cited 7 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 46 health citations since March 2023, 3 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (3 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $57,708 in the last three years; the largest was $47,347, and the latest is dated July 15, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 2.88 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.39 of those hours.
62.0% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Wellsential Health, an affiliated group of 67 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 46 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services including procedures that assure the accurate administering of all drugs and biologicals to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 2 residents observed during incontinent care. (Residents #2) The facility failed to have a physician order in place for the administration of Zinc cream (topical skin protectant containing zinc oxide that is used to soothe, heal, and protect irritated or damaged skin) to Resident #2. This failure could place residents at risk for receiving drugs without an order and put them at risk for an adverse reaction to unprescribed medications and use of unnecessary medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, 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 2 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure CNA A and CNA B performed proper hand hygiene and used one wipe per swipe during peri care (incontinent care) for Resident #1 on 07/23/26. These deficient practices could place residents at risk of infections, healthcare associated with cross contamination, and the spread of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that were complete and accurately documented for 1 of 4 Residents (Resident #1) reviewed for medical records.1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's medical records were complete. 2. The facility failed to ensure staff documented the complete assessment, treatment, and outcome of a possible skin injury to Residents 1's right foot on 6/9/26. These deficient practices could place residents at risk for errors in care and treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, and interview, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and sanitary environment for 2 (room [ROOM NUMBER] and room [ROOM NUMBER]) of 10 rooms. The facility failed to maintain a lighting fixture, and AC ducts from dripping water and water damage in rooms [ROOM NUMBERS]. These failures could place residents at risk for exposure to an unclean, unsanitary environment, risk of falls and other injuries due to an unsafe environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the right for a resident to refuse or discontinue treatment for 1 of 5 Residents (Resident #1) whose records were reviewed for resident rights. The DON, failed to stop Depakote after Resident #1's RP requested the medication be stopped immediately on [DATE]. This deficient practice could affect any resident and could result in residents believing their right to refuse a medication does not matter.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure review and revision of comprehensive care plans for 1 resident (Resident #1) of 5 residents reviewed for comprehensive care plan revisions in that: The facility failed to review and revise Resident #1's comprehensive person-centered care plan to address the initiation of Depakote, an antiseizure medication used for mood disorder. This deficient practice could affect residents and place them at risk of not receiving appropriate interventions to meet their current needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice and the comprehensive person-centered care plan, for 1 resident (Resident #1) of 5 residents reviewed for quality of care, in that: The facility failed to consult with Resident #1's physician concerning the discontinuation of Depakote at RP's request. These failures placed residents in the facility at risk for not receiving care according to professional standards.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure, based on the comprehensive assessment of a resident, that residents received treatment and care in accordance with the professional standards of practice of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices 1 of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 had orders in place for wound care for arterial wounds to his left dorsum foot, right dorsum foot, left plantar foot, right plantar foot, right palm, right dorsum hand and surgical wound with 12 sutures to left plantar 3rd digit - amputation site until 08/19/25, after the resident was readmitted on [DATE], This deficient practice could place residents at risk for receiving inadequate treatments which could result in the worsening of the wounds.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for storage, preparation and sanitation. 1. The facility failed to ensure the juice gun nozzle, coffee maker, cabinets, drinking glasses, pitchers, and utensils were clean. 2. The facility failed to ensure the area under a prep sink was free from water damage and debris. 3. The facility failed to ensure the underside of the shelf on the stove, directly above cooking food, was kept clean. 4. The facility failed to ensure dirty utensils were not kept in a clean drawer. 5. The facility to ensure dry storage items were not left on the floor. 6. The facility failed to ensure spices were not left open to air when not in use. 7. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to establish and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment, and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 3 of 5 residents (Resident #97, Resident #111 , ) reviewed for infection control practices. 1. The facility failed to ensure proper contact precautions for infections of ESBL and MRSA were followed for Resident #97 to prevent cross-contamination and possible infection. 2. The facility failed to ensure proper contact isolation precautions were followed for Resident #9 to prevent cross-contamination and spread of infection. 3. The facility failed to ensure proper Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) were followed for Resident #111 when checking blood sugar and administering insulin. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the residents' environment remained free of accidents or hazards as possible for 1 of 5 residents' (Resident #29 and Resident #70) bathrooms reviewed for environment. The facility failed to maintain and ensure all chemicals were labeled appropriately and put away appropriately out of Resident #29 and #70's shared bathroom. This failure could place residents at risk for injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review revealed based on a resident's comprehensive assessment, the facility must ensure that a resident maintained acceptable parameters of nutritional status, such as usual body weight or desirable body weight range, unless the resident's clinical condition demonstrates that this is not possible or resident preferences indicate otherwise for 1 of 5 Residents (Resident #35 ) whose records were reviewed for weight loss. Nursing staff failed to follow physician orders to weigh Resident #35 weekly for four weeks, effective 07/17/25. This deficient practice could affect residents at risk for losing weight and result in unplanned weight loss and a decline in the resident's overall health.
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 5 residents (Resident#2) reviewed for oxygen in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #2's oxygen was administered at the correct setting of 2 liters per minute on 08/10/2025 as ordered by the physician. This deficient practice could place residents who receive respiratory care at an increased risk of developing respiratory complications and a decreased quality of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were secured and stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles and standards for 1 of 4 medication carts (400 Hall Med-Aide Medication Cart) reviewed for storage. The facility failed to ensure the 400 Hall Med-Aide medication cart was locked and secured. This failure could place the residents at risk of gaining access to unlocked medications that were not prescribed to them.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received food prepared in a form designed to meet individual needs for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #100) reviewed for pureed diet needs. The facility failed to provide Resident #100 with her regular pureed diet (that was prescribed for individuals who have difficulty chewing or swallowing food) as designated on her meal ticket on 08/10/25. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for poor food intake, weight loss, and not having their nutritional needs met. Record review of Resident #100‘s face sheet dated 11/23/21 reflected the resident was a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Diagnoses included Stroke, Muscle wasting, and dysphasia (difficulty swallowing). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents remained free from accidents, hazards and each resident received adequate supervision and assistance while providing care for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents and supervision. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received supervision when outside in his wheelchair. Resident #1 wheeled his way down the parking lot to the road, flipping his wheelchair where the parking lot met the roadway pinning Resident #1 on the roadway where he was unable to get up. The non-compliance was identified as past non-compliance. The Immediate jeopardy began on 12/31/2024 and ended on 01/02/2025. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents had the right to be free from abuse, neglect, and misappropriation of property for 6 of 8 residents (Residents #6, #9, #7, and R#10) reviewed for abuse. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #6 was free from abuse when Resident #7 dug her nails on Resident #6's left forearm that resulted with multiple skin tears with serosanguineous drainage on 01/02/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #9 was free from abuse when Resident #6 hit Resident 9 on her upper left arm with a closed hand on 03/25/2025.3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7 was free from abuse when Resident #2 slapped Resident #7 on the left side of the face with a closed hand on 03/25/2025. 4. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, or mistreatment, were reported immediately to the State Survey Agency, within two hours if the events that cause the allegation involve abuse or result in serious bodily injury, or not later than 24 hours if the events that cause the allegation do not involve abuse and do not result in serious bodily injury, for 3 (Resident #5, Resident #3, and Resident #2) of 4 residents reviewed for neglect. The facility failed to report allegations of resident neglect for Resident #5 to the State Survey Agency within the allotted time frame of 2 hours on 05/24/25 when Resident #5 had a fall at around 7:30 AM and sustained a serious bodily injury (distal fibular diametaphyseal fracture). The facility failed to report two Resident - to - Resident altercations. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records on each resident that were complete and accurately documented in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices for 3 (Resident #2, Resident#3, Resident #4) of 5 residents reviewed for accuracy and completeness of clinical records. 1. The facility failed to ensure LVN A and LVN F correctly completed Resident #4's neuro checks between 05/24/25 and 05/27/25. 2. The facility failed to ensure LVN A documented on Resident #4's electronic medical record; he had a nosebleed after the fall he sustained on 05/24/25. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4's left inferior orbital wall fracture was documented on his electronic medical record. 4. The facility failed to ensure two Resident-to-Resident altercations were documented thoroughly. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure the residents right to be informed 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 1 of 5 residents (Resident #3, Resident #6 ) reviewed for consent for antipsychotic medications in that: 1. Resident #3 was prescribed and administered Haldol (an antipsychotic) without prior consent based on information of the benefits, risks, and options available. 2. The facility failed to ensure psychoactive medication consents for Resident #6's were signed and dated by his guardian for the use of Zyprexa (antipsychotic medication), Buspirone (anxiolytic medication), lorazepam (benzodiazepine medication), and Risperidone (antipsychotic medication). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 (Resident #3) of 5 residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The facility failed to ensure Resident #3 was evaluated before administering an antipsychotic (Haldol). This failure could place residents at risk of receiving care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on 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 included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial need that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for comprehensive person-centered care plans. The facility failed to develop interventions in a comprehensive person-centered care plan for Resident #2 to address his behavior of putting small items in his mouth such as crayons. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of not being provided with the necessary care or services and not having personalized plans developed to address their specific needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to review and revise comprehensive care plans for 4 residents (Residents, #1, #2, #7, and #6) of 10 residents reviewed comprehensive care plan revisions. 1. The facility failed to review and revise Resident #1's comprehensive person-centered care plan from Full Code Status to DNR Status when ordered DNR was dated [DATE]. 2. The facility failed to review and revise Resident #7's comprehensive person-centered care plan when he had a resident-to-resident altercation with Resident #6 when she grabbed his left forearm and pierced skin with her fingernails which caused multiple skin tears on [DATE] at 5:30 p.m., 3. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received therapeutic diets that were prescribed by the attending physician for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #8) reviewed for therapeutic diets. The facility failed to ensure Resident #8 received a house shake on 07/14/2025 with his breakfast tray as ordered by his physician with orders dated 07/11/2025 for a house shake with meals for malnutrition and a revised order effective 07/14/2025 for a house shake with meals for supplement. This failure could place residents at risk for poor intake, weight loss, unmet nutritional needs, and a loss of dignity. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals to meet the needs of each resident for 1 (Resident #3) of 5 residents reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to verify there was a physician's order for Haldol (an antipsychotic) and to ensure the order had an indication of its use. This failure could place residents at risk for receiving an antipsychotic medication without a physician's order or an indication for use resulting in a resident receiving a medication which could cause a decline in health status.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure any drug regimen irregularities reported by the Pharmacist Consultant were acted upon, for 1 (Resident #3) of 5 residents whose medications were reviewed. The facility failed to act on the facility's Pharmacy Consultant recommendations for Resident #3 ' s Haldol order for 1. An approved psychiatric diagnosis and 2. To have an informed consent on file. This failure could place residents receiving antipsychotic medications at risk for adverse consequences and could cause a decline in their physical, mental, and psychosocial condition.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident's drug regimen was free of unnecessary drugs for 1 (Resident #3) of 5 residents reviewed for medications. The facility failed to have an adequate indication for the use of the medication Haldol (an antipsychotic) for Resident #3 before administering the medication with a black box warning. This failure could put residents at risk of harm from adverse reactions or harmful side effects.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review the facility failed to have physician orders for the resident's immediate care at time of admission for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for physician admission orders. 1. Resident #2 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] and did not have orders in place for blood sugar checks and had an episode of low blood sugar on 04/08/25 that required him to be sent to hospital. 2. Resident #2 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] and did not have wound care orders in place for identified impaired skin intergrity until 04/07/25. An IJ was identified on 05/06/25. The IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 5:18PM . [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review the facility failed to provide treatment and care in accordance with the comprehensive person-centered care plan and in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for quality of care. 1. Resident #2 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] and did not have orders in place for wound care for MASD to sacrum, diabetic wound to left heel and left dorsum foot or abrasion to penis until 04/07/25. 2. Resident #2 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE] and did not have orders in place for blood sugar checks and had an episode of low blood sugar on 04/08/25 that required him to be sent to hospital. An IJ was identified on 05/06/25. The IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 5:18PM . [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain clinical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that are complete and accurately documented for 3 of 4 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2 and Resident #7) reviewed for medical records accuracy, in that: 1. Resident #1's March 2025 Treatment Administration Record (TAR) documentation was incomplete. Staff did not sign off on the treatment ordered for Resident #1's wound care. 2. Resident #2's March 2025 TAR documentation was incomplete. Staff did not sign off on the treatment ordered for Resident #2's wound care. Resident #2's April Medication Administration Record (MAR) was incomplete. Staff did not document and sign off on Resident #2's blood sugar checks and insulin orders. 3. Resident #7's April and May 2025 MAR documentation was incomplete. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a person-centered care plan for each resident that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 4 of 4 residents (Resident #1, #2, #3, and #4) reviewed for comprehensive care plans. 1. The facility did not include Resident #1's wound and physician ordered wound care on his care plan. 2. The facility did not include Resident #2's diet and the need for crushed medications on their care plan. 3. The facility did not include Resident #3's diet and the need for crushed medications on their care plan. 4. The facility did not include Resident #2's diet and the need for crushed medications on their care plan. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, 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 2 of 4 residents (Residents #3 and #4), reviewed for pharmaceutical services. 1. The facility failed to obtain and input orders for crushed medication for Resident #3. 2. The facility failed to obtain and input orders for crushed medication for Resident #4. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving their medication safely. 1. Record review of Resident #3's face sheet, dated 09/11/24, revealed the resident was an [AGE] year-old male who was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services including procedures that assure accurate acquiring and administering of all drugs to meet the need of the resident for four residents (Resident #12, Resident #23, Resident #35, Resident #63) of ten residents reviewed for medications. 1. Resident #12 had four unidentified pills and two capsules in a medication cup on his overbed table that Resident #12 had not taken. 2. The Medication Aide left Resident #12's medications on his bedside table and documented that the medications had been administered. 3. Resident #23 had five medications that were not signed off on the MAR on 06/16/2024 and 06/24/2024. 4. Resident #35 had two medications that were not signed off on the MAR on 06/16/2024 and 06/24/2024. 5. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preference for two (resident #90 and resident #98) of four residents reviewed for call light. The facility failed to ensure Resident #90 and Resident #98's call lights were within reach. This failure could place residents at risk of being unable to obtain assistance when needed and help in the event of an emergency.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident's right to formulate advance directives for 1 (Resident #356) of 20 residents reviewed for advance directives. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #356s code status was entered in the records at the facility. This deficient practice could place the residents at risk of not having their end of life wishes honored, such as receiving unwanted resuscitative measures.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to develop a baseline care plan within 48 hours of a resident's admission that included the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of 1 (Resident #356) of 4 residents reviewed for baseline care plan completion. The facility failed to complete the advance directive section in the baseline care plan for Resident #356 within the required 48-hour timeframe. This deficient practice could place the residents at risk of not having their end of life wishes honored, such as receiving unwanted resuscitative measures.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, 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, and mental and psychosocial needs that are identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #63) reviewed for care plans, in that: The facility failed to ensure Resident #63's comprehensive care plan dated 05/29/2024 reflected she was in the secured unit due to a high risk of elopement. This deficient practice could place residents in the facility at risk of not being provided with the necessary care or services and no having personalized plans developed to address their specific needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections and restore continence to the extent possible for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #255) reviewed for indwelling catheters. The facility failed to prevent Resident #255's urinary catheter tubing from touching the floor. This failure could place residents at risk for urinary tract infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needs respiratory care was provided with professional standards of practice for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #258 and Resident #260) reviewed for oxygen in that: 1. Resident #258's oxygen was administered at 3.5 Lpm instead of 2 Lpm via nasal cannula as ordered by physician. 2. Resident #260's oxygen was administered at 2.5 Lpm instead of 3.0 Lpm via nasal cannula as ordered by physician. This failure could place residents who receive respiratory care at risk of developing respiratory complications and a decreased qualify of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure the assessment accurately reflected the resident's status for 2 (Resident #1 and #2) of 7 residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was coded in the MDS for a fall. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2 was coded in the MDS for a fall. This failure could place residents at risk of improper or incorrect care and services necessary for their physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to enact a policy regarding use and storage of foods brought to residents by family and other visitors to ensure safe and sanitary storage, handling, and consumption, for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed, in that: A plastic bag with food inside that contained tamales was found in Resident #1's night stand. The food was unlabeled, undated and not refrigerated. This deficient practice could lead to illness due to foodborne pathogens.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices that were complete and accurately documented for 1 of 5 residents (R #1) reviewed for accuracy of records. The facility did not document R #1's urostomy bag was changed in the TAR on 01/24/24, 01/31/24 and 02/14/24. The facility did not document a for R #1's left ankle pain on 02/10/24. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving adequate care and services due to inaccurate reflection of care provided.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for 1 of 8 residents (Resident # 91) reviewed for comprehensive person-centered care plan in that: Resident #91's comprehensive care plan did not reflect the severe weight loss of the resident. This failure could affect residents who require care at the facility and could result in a deterioration of the resident's health status.
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 biological's) to meet the needs of each resident, for 1 of 4 medication carts reviewed. 1 medication was found to be expired in the 200 Hall medication cart. This failure could place residents receiving medications at risk for administering medication incorrectly or missing a dose of medications that could result in ineffective treatment and/or exacerbation of the disease process.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure medications were stored in accordance with currently accepted professional principles on 1 of 1 medication rooms reviewed. The narcotic lock box located in the medication room refrigerator was not affixed to the refrigerator. This failure could place residents receiving medications at risk for administering medication incorrectly of missing a dose of medications that could result in ineffective treatment and/or exacerbation of the disease process.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designated to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development of and transmission of communicable disease and infection for 2 (Resident #249 and Resident #252) residents reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure MA A disinfected the blood pressure cuff in between blood pressure checks for Resident #252 and Resident #249. This failure could place residents at risk for cross contamination which could result in infections or illness.
2 fire safety citations on file: 2 on August 12, 2025.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| July 15, 2025 | Fine | $10,361 |
| May 8, 2025 | Fine | $47,347 |
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) | 2.88 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.39 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.50 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.73 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.77 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 62.0% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 75.0% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 2 |
CMS expects 4.38 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 3.03 on weekdays and 2.50 on weekends, 17% 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 2.83 in April to June 2025 to 2.88 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 | 2.88 | 0.39 | 3.03 | 2.50 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 99 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.01 | 0.41 | 3.16 | 2.64 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 103 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.14 | 0.39 | 3.28 | 2.77 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 101 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 2.83 | 0.23 | 3.05 | 2.27 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 111 |
| 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 | 9.0 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.7 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.2 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.5 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.8 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.9 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 27.3 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 19.2 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Brownsville Nursing and Rehabilitation Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (61.3% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
61.3% 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. 96 eligible stays.
11.9% 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. 104 eligible stays.
5.5% 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. 61 eligible stays.
45.0% 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. 20 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Texas0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 35 residents counted.
2.2% 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. 35 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. 20 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: VAL VERDE COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT. CMS links this home to Wellsential Health, a group of 67 nursing homes averaging 2.7 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Val Verde County Hospital District | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 04/01/2022 |
| Regency IHS of Brownsville LLC | Direct ownership interest | Organization | 04/01/2022 | |
| Csv Rhea Management Holdco, LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 04/01/2022 | |
| Dwd Tx Holdings LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 04/01/2022 | |
| Jack and Nancy Dwyer Workforce Development Center Inc | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 04/01/2022 | |
| Reg Leased Opco LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 04/01/2022 | |
| Reg Operator Holdco LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 04/01/2022 | |
| Regency Integrated Health Services LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 04/01/2022 | |
| Regency Texas Holdings LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 04/01/2022 | |
| Baird, Daniel | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 04/13/2021 | |
| Carvajal, Antonio | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/16/2024 | |
| Clapp, Barbara | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 06/01/2021 | |
| Cortese, Daren | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 08/10/2021 | |
| Diaz, Cris | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/25/2022 | |
| Gibson, Patricia | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 08/01/2021 | |
| Gonzales, Veronica | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/16/2024 | |
| Jurado, Jorge | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 10/13/2023 | |
| Kaufman, Nicole | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 08/10/2021 | |
| Mandelbaum, Elliot | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Otazo, Julio | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/25/2022 | |
| Palmer, Robin | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 11/18/2020 | |
| Calderon, Javier | Corporate officer | Individual | 05/29/2024 | |
| Chartrand, Daniel | Corporate officer | Individual | 05/19/2014 | |
| Gomez, Seferino | Corporate officer | Individual | 05/29/2024 | |
| Jurado, Jorge | Corporate officer | Individual | 10/13/2023 | |
| Keenen, Lee | Corporate officer | Individual | 05/25/2022 | |
| Regency IHS of Brownsville LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 04/01/2022 | |
| Regency Integrated Health Services LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 04/01/2022 | |
| Val Verde County Hospital District | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 04/01/2022 | |
| Calderon, Luis | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/03/2025 | |
| Dekowski, Donovan | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2022 | |
| 320 Lorenally Drive LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2022 | |
| Regency IHS Clinical Consulting, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2022 | |
| Regency IHS of Brownsville LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/17/2025 | |
| Regency IHS Rehab LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2022 | |
| Regency Integrated Health Services LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/17/2025 | |
| Val Verde County Hospital District | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/17/2025 | |
| Briseno, Melissa | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Calderon, Luis | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 02/03/2025 | |
| Dekowski, Donovan | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2022 | |
| Udeh, Darlington | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/10/2021 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Texas. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.