6500 Brush Country Rd., Austin, TX 78749 · Travis County · (512) 892-5774
118 certified beds, about 65 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1993
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 675118 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on August 21, 2025, inspectors cited 16 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 46 health citations since June 2023, 3 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (2 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 3 fines totaling $130,834 in the last three years; the largest was $98,098, and the latest is dated October 4, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.05 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.33 of those hours.
77.8% 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 46 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on 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 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 one of five residents (Resident #1) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to develop a care plan to reflect that Resident #1 had an Authorized Electronic Monitor (AEM) device in her room after the family consented. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of diminished rights and dignity.
Inspectors wroteBased on 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 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to administer Resident #1's Biofreeze medication, per the physician's ordered times, and no greater than one hour after the scheduled administration time in March 2026, April 2026, and May 2026. This failure could have placed residents at risk for receiving less than therapeutic benefits from medications and increased pain.
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 for the facility's only kitchen and only nourishment room reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to label and date food items in the walk-in refrigerator. The facility failed to dispose of expired food items located in the walk-in refrigerator. The facility failed to effectively reseal all food items in the walk-in refrigerator to prevent contamination, spoilage, or exposure to air. The facility failed to maintain a sanitary environment for food storage in the kitchen. The facility failed to maintain a sanitary open front refrigerator in the nourishment room. These failures could place residents at risk of cross contamination, loss of nutritional value, and foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure drugs are stored properly and only authorized persons have access for 1 of 4 medication carts (MC #1) reviewed for drug storage and labeling. The facility failed to ensure MC #1 was locked, medications secured, and not accessible to other staff, residents, or visitors. This failure could place residents at risk of having unauthorized access to medications, decreased effectiveness of medication, or missing medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on 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 2 of 9 (Resident #1 and Resident #2) residents reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to order Resident #1's Percocet with Oxycodone timely to ensure Resident #1 did not run out on 11/09/2025. The facility failed to order Resident #2's Oxycodone timely to ensure Resident #2 did not run out on 11/10/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving the therapeutic benefits of medications which could lead to increased pain, and diminished quality of life. Findings Included:Resident #1 face sheet dated 11/11/2025 revealed a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed make sure that drugs are stored properly and only authorized persons have access for 1 of 3 medication carts (MC #1) and the facility's only medication refrigerator reviewed for drug storage. The facility failed to ensure MC #1, was locked, medications secured, and not accessible to other staff, residents, or visitors. The facility failed to ensure the medication refrigerator was at the correct temperature for medications stored in the refrigerator. These failures could place residents at risk of having unauthorized access to medications, decreased effectiveness of medication, or missing medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that pain management is provided to residents who require such services, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for pain. The facility failed to provide effective pain interventions for Resident #1 on 09/14/2025. Resident #1 called for emergency transfer to the ER for pain management. An IJ was identified on10/03/2025. The IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 12:34 pm. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure the Residents room was equipped for adequate nursing care, comfort, and privacy for two (Resident #1 and Resident #2) of seven Residents observed for privacy. The facility failed to ensure that there was a privacy curtain in Resident #2 and Resident #3's bedroom to provide privacy. This place Residents at risks for decreased privacy, dignity and quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen and the facility's only nourishment room reviewed for food and nutrition services. 1. The facility failed to label and date food items in the only walk-in refrigerator. 2. The facility failed to label and date food items in the only nourishment refrigerator.3. The facility failed to maintain the proper temperature of the refrigerator in the nourishment room.4. The facility failed to ensure that the walk-in freezer was maintained at acceptable temperatures which resulted in frozen foods thawing out and then re-freezing without being discarded. 5. The facility failed to ensure that foods were stored away from leaks of malfunctioning cooling fans in the walk-in refrigerator. 6. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure each resident was treated with respect and dignity and care in a manner and in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality for 3 of 15 residents (Resident #17, Resident #35, and Resident #80) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure CNA A and LVN B knocked on Resident #17, Resident #35, and Resident #80's doors when going into the residents' rooms. The deficient practice could place residents at risk of poor self-esteem and feeling like their privacy was being invaded or the facility was not their home.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for 3 of 3 residents (Resident #48, Resident #68, and Resident #93) reviewed for accuracy of assessments. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #48's admission MDS, dated [DATE], accurately reflected his smoking status.2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #68's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], accurately reflected her smoking status. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #93's quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], accurately reflected her smoking status. These failures could place residents at risk of inadequate supervision due to an inaccurate assessment for smoking status.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the residents rights, 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 8 of 16 (Resident #7, Resident #10, Resident #17, Resident #21 Resident #31, Resident #65, Resident #68 and Resident #86) reviewed for care plans. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7's comprehensive care plan was updated after the code status was changed from full code to DNR on [DATE]. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident # 10, Resident #17 and Resident #21's comprehensive care plan was updated with Resident #10, Resident #17, and Resident #21's in room activity needs. 3. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed, to provide, based on the comprehensive assessment and care plan and the preferences of each resident, an ongoing activities program to support residents in their choice of activities, both facility sponsored group and individual activities, and independent activities, designed to meet the interests of and support the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident, encouraging both independence and interaction in the community for three of six residents ( Resident #10, Resident #17, and Resident #21) reviewed for activities. The facility failed to provide Resident # 3, Resident #10, Resident #17, and Resident #21 in room activities during July 2025 and August 1st thru August 22, 2025. This failure could place residents at risk for boredom, depression, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to have sufficient nursing staff to provide nursing and related services to assure resident safety and attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident as determined by considering the number, acuity, and diagnoses of the facility's resident population in accordance with the facility assessment for 4 (Residents #17, #37, #3, and #73) of 20 residents reviewed for sufficient staffing. The facility failed to ensure that the facility had sufficient staffing to meet the needs of Residents #17, #37, #3, and #73. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to serve foods that were palatable and attractive and prepare food by methods that conserve nutritive value, flavor, and appearance for 1 of 1 kitchen observed. 1. The two test tray for lunch meal included foods that were bland, and unappealing. 2. The lunch meal trays being delivered to 300 hall residents were unappealing with small side portions. 3. The meal delivery cart doors left open during delivery of hallway meals and reducing the food temperatures. 4. Watery and mushy vegetables served to residents on 08/20/2025. These failures could place residents at risk of decreased food intake, hungry, unwanted weight loss, and diminished quality of life.
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 infection for 4 of 6 residents (Resident #29, #65, #70 and #86) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA C doffed gloves after giving care to Resident #65 and #86 disposed of PPE properly on 08/19/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure staff wore PPE while providing high contact resident care (transfers and medication administration through a gastrostomy tube) to Residents #29 and #70 on 08/21/2025. These failures could place residents at risk for infection, hospitalization, or death.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to maintain essential kitchen equipment in safe operating conditions and according to manufacturers' specifications for the facility's one walk-in refrigerator and one walk-in freezer. 1. The facility failed to ensure that the walk-in freezer temperature was in safe operating conditions of 0 . 2. The facility failed to ensure the walk-in refrigerator's cooling fans were in safe operating conditions. These failures could place residents at risk for health complications, foodborne illnesses, and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to develop, implement, and maintain an effective training program for all new and existing staff; individuals providing services under a contractual arrangement; and volunteers, consistent with their expected roles, for 2 of 3 (SW, and Marketing) staff reviewed for training in Care Plans and PASRR services in that:The facility failed to train the Social Worker in the assigned SW areas in the PASRR, and updating the Care Plans for advance directives. The facility failed to train the Marketing person about ensuring a PASRR was received at admission. This failure could place residents at risk for harm by not having a complete and accurate care plan or having a PASRR completed to support the residents needs and preferences.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident had a right to personal privacy and confidentiality of his or her personal and medical records for 1 of 5 residents (Resident # 31) reviewed for medical record confidentiality. The facility failed to ensure RN D kept Resident # 31's medical information confidential. This failure could place residents at risk of their medical information being provided to unauthorized personnel, other residents, or visitors.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a new resident was not admitted with mental illness unless the state mental health authority determined, based on independent physical and mental evaluation performed by a person or entity other than the State mental health authority, prior to admission for 1 of 12 residents (Resident #17) reviewed for PASRR services. The facility failed to ensure a PASRR screening was completed for Resident #17. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for not obtaining the services needed to treat their mental health diagnoses.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident that included the instructions needed to provide effective and person-centered care of the resident that met professional standards of quality care for one of three residents (Resident # 29) reviewed for baseline care plans. The facility failed to complete a baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission for Resident #29. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure comprehensive care plans were developed within 7 days after completion of the comprehensive assessment for 2 of 7 residents (Resident #78 and Resident #37) reviewed for comprehensive assessments and timing. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #78's Comprehensive Care Plan was completed within seven days of the completion of the comprehensive assessment and no more than 21 days after admission. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #37's Comprehensive Care Plan was completed within seven days of the completion of the comprehensive assessment and no more than 21 days after admission. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving necessary care and services or having important care needs identified and met.
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 and personal and oral hygiene for 1 of 12 residents (Resident #38) reviewed for Activities of Daily Living. The facility failed to ensure Resident #38 was provided her showers 3 times a week as scheduled. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving services or care, diminished quality of life, and decreased self-esteem.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals were stored in locked compartments, under proper temperature controls, and labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for 1 of 1 medication storage room refrigerator and 1 of 3 (200 hall) medication carts reviewed for medication storage. 1. The facility failed to ensure the 200-hall medication cart was locked and medications were secured and not accessible to other staff, residents, or visitors. 2. The facility failed to ensure the refrigerator maintained the adequate temperature to store medications (35 - 40 degrees Fahrenheit) that required refrigeration prior to opening. These failures could place residents at risk of having unauthorized access to medications, decreased effectiveness of medication, or missed medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan 7 days after each comprehensive assessment and no more than 21 days after admission for 2 of 5 residents (Residents #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for care plan revision and timing. 1. The facility failed to updated Resident #1's care plan to reflect Resident #1's foley catheter was removed in 2023. 2. The facility failed to implement a comprehensive care plan for Resident #2. This failure placed residents at risk of not receiving the appropriate care and services to maintain the highest practical well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility did not provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident for seven (Resident #1, Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, Resident #5, Resident #6, and Resident #7) of 10 residents reviewed for pharmaceutical services. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 , Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #4, Resident #5, Resident #6 and Resident #7 received their medications scheduled at 5:00 pm on 05/25/25.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice to promote wound healing and to prevent new pressure ulcers from developing for one (Resident #1) of five residents reviewed for pressure injuries. The facility failed to: - Complete weekly skin assessments for Resident #1 or provide treatments from 04/18/25 - 05/06/25 to a pressure area on his left foot which developed into a pressure wound. - Provide wound care consistently to Resident #1's sacral wound causing it to worsen. These failures resulted in an identification of an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) on 05/06/25 at 4:54 PM, and an IJ template was given. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to use the services of a registered nurse for at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week for 8 (1/1/25, 1/2/25, 1/3/25, 1/4/25, 1/5/25, 1/6/25, 1/7/25, and 1/8/25) of 9 days reviewed for RN coverage. The facility failed to ensure they had an RN charge nurse on duty for 8 days 01/01/2025 through 01/08/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of missed nursing assessments, interventions, care, and treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services, including timely administration of all drugs and biologicals to meet the needs for 2 (Resident #1 & #2) of 5 residents reviewed for pharmaceutical services. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's scheduled medications were administered in a timely manner in accordance with professional standards. Resident #1 was not given her carvedilol (a medication to lower blood pressure and regulate the heart rate) a total of 3 times, her hydralazine (a medication to lower blood pressure) a total of one time, isosorbide dinitrate (a medication to lower blood pressure) a total of one time and ciprofloxacin (an antibiotic) a total of one time. Resident #1 was given the following medications outside of the one hour before and one hour after window that meets professional standards: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the correct the resident and their family members had sufficient preparation and orientation to ensure safe and orderly discharge from the facility to home for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 resident's reviewed for discharge rights. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 had the correct medications that were prescribed to her upon discharge on [DATE]. Resident #1 was discharged on 12/15/2024 with a blister card of Furosemide 40mg tablets, that were prescribed to Resident #3. Resident #1 was prescribed Furosemide 20mg tablets upon discharge. This failure could put the resident at risk for adverse reactions to a medication not prescribed to her including worsening kidney function, low blood pressure, and hospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure that medical records were accurately documented for three (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3) of five residents reviewed for accurate medical records. The facility failed to ensure Residents #1 and #2's facility self-reported incidents were documented in their EMRs and Resident #3's vitals were accurately documented. This deficient practice could result in errors in care and treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure resident rights for personal privacy for 5 of 5 residents (Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #16, Resident #25, and Resident #54) residents reviewed for personal privacy. The facility failed to knock on Resident #2, Resident #3, Resident #16, Resident #25, and Resident #54's door when going into the residents' rooms. The deficient practice could affect all residents right to privacy in the facility and cause the resident to feel like their privacy is being invaded or the facility is not their home.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure the safe handling, humidification, cleaning, storage, and dispensing of oxygen for respiratory care services provided to 3 of 3 residents The facility failed to ensure Resident's oxygen tubing was dated to ensure it was changed weekly for 3 residents (Residents 9, 16, and 25. The facility failed to have a written policy to ensure the safe handling, humidification, cleaning, storage, and dispensing of oxygen on 7/23/24. The facility failed to ensure that the humidifier bottle had water for Resident 25. This failure placed the residents at risk of developing a respiratory infection from contamination of the tubing and humidifier water.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for foods safety for 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for food safety and sanitation. The facility failed to ensure all food items were labeled and dated. The facility failed to ensure meat was properly thawed to the correct temperature. These failures placed residents at risk of foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide the physician prescribed therapeutic diet to 1 of 4 residents (Resident #9) reviewed for therapeutic diets. Resident #9 did not receive a mechanical soft diet as ordered. This failure affected one resident and placed her at risk for choking and causing further health issues.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure all residents were discharged per facility requirements for one (Resident #1) of 8 residents reviewed for discharge requirements. The facility failed to complete and document in Resident #1's chart her discharge planning and summary upon her discharge on [DATE]. This failure placed residents at risk of improper discharges.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide appropriate timing of notice before transfer for one (Resident #1) of 8 residents reviewed for discharge notices. The facility failed to provide notice at least 30 days before Resident #1 was discharged on 4/12/2024. This failure placed residents at risk of being improperly discharged .
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a copy of the records or any portions thereof (including in an electronic form or format when such records are maintained electronically) upon request and 2 working days advance notice to the facility to one (Resident#1) of 5 residents reviewed for planning care. As on 03/05/24, the facility failed to provide a copy of the results of the care plan meeting conducted on 01/25/24, as requested by Resident #1 and her representative initially on 02/04/24 and reminded again on 02/16/24. This failure could place the resident at risk for not being a part of the decision making related to their care resulting in decreased quality of care, loss of independence, and decreased psychosocial well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a resident with urinary incontinence appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for urinary catheters (Resident #1) in that, RN A failed to transcribe Resident #1's foley catheter order correctly and LVN B did not insert Resident #1's foley catheter according to physician orders and Resident #1 was sent to the local hospita ER, was admitted in ICU for sepsis after experiencing a change of condition on 02/04/2024. This failure could place residents with indwelling catheters at risk for infections, discomfort, and sepsis .
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide comfortable and safe temperature levels at a range of 71 to 81 degrees Fahrenheit for two (Resident #1 and Resident #2) of eight residents reviewed for homelike environment. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 and Resident #2's room was maintained less than 81 degrees Fahrenheit in that the room reached 88.9 degrees Fahrenheit. This failure could place residents at a major risk of heat exhaustion, dehydration, hospitalization, and death.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents had a right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment which included but was not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely for three of eight rooms (Room # 305, #310, and #508) reviewed for environment. The facility failed to ensure resident rooms were cleaned and sanitized daily, and in accordance with the facility's Housekeeping Workers' Checklist. This failure could place residents at risk of the spread of disease-causing organisms in the residents' living areas and on resident care equipment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide food was prepared by methods that conserve nutritive value, flavor and appearance and food and drink was palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature for 1 of 8 residents (Residents #72 ) that were reviewed for meal presentation and taste. 1. The facility failed to ensure [NAME] A prepared regular, mechanical, and puree stir fry chicken and vegetables with taste and not overcooked during meal service on 06/14/23. Resident meals were observed mushy and watery for the puree, and the vegetables overcooked. 2. The DM failed to serve juice that was not watered down. The apple and cranberry juice contained more water than juice. 3. The DM failed to have orange juice available to resident's during the machine outage from 6/10/23 to 06/14/23. [...]
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 the facility's only kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation for 84 residents that received meals from the kitchen. The facility kitchen staff failed to label and date food stored in the dry storage, preparing areas and the kitchen. These failures could place residents at risk for food-born illness and food contamination.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #234) reviewed for Activities of Daily Living care provided to dependent residents. The facility failed to ensure Resident #234 received baths or showers since being admitted to the facility on [DATE]. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving necessary services to maintain good personal hygiene.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles, and included the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions, and the expiration date when applicable and the facility failed to ensure, in accordance with State and Federal laws, all drugs were stored in locked compartments under proper temperature controls, and permitted only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for 2 of 4 medication carts (#1 and #2) reviewed for medication storage. 1. The facility failed to ensure the medication carts #1 and #2 were secured and unable to be accessed by unauthorized personnel and residents. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving drugs and biologicals as needed and a drug diversion.
Inspectors wroteBased 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 two of three residents (Resident #10 and Resident #24) reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure MA S sanitized the blood pressure device and cuff between use with Resident #10 and Resident #24. This failure could place residents at risk of cross-contamination and infections.
8 fire safety citations on file: 8 on June 15, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| October 4, 2025 | Fine | $23,912 |
| May 7, 2025 | Fine | $98,098 |
| February 26, 2024 | Fine | $8,824 |
| February 26, 2024 | Payment Denial | 10 days from March 26, 2024 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Texas | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.05 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.33 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.61 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.95 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.77 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 77.8% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 100.0% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.51 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 3.23 on weekdays and 2.61 on weekends, 19% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 3.9% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 2.43 in April to June 2025 to 3.05 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 | 3.05 | 0.33 | 3.23 | 2.61 | 3.9% | 0 of 90 | 65 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.03 | 0.39 | 3.16 | 2.71 | 3.9% | 0 of 92 | 74 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.33 | 0.61 | 3.43 | 3.05 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 82 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 2.43 | 0.45 | 2.50 | 2.27 | 6.3% | 0 of 91 | 85 |
| 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 | 30.9 | 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 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.8 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.3 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 29.2 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.4 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.9 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 23.3 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 12.8 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.6 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.5 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Brush Country Nursing and Rehabilitation's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (43.0% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
43.0% 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. 34 eligible stays.
10.2% 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. 51 eligible stays.
6.6% 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. 34 eligible stays.
69.2% 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. 26 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. 45 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Texas1.3% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 45 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Texas98.5% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 13 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: WEST WHARTON COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thompson, Johnny | Corporate officer | Individual | 05/16/2024 | |
| Pmg Opco - Austin, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 11/01/2025 | |
| Priority Management Group, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 11/01/2025 | |
| Bauder, William | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/01/2025 | |
| Gutierrez, Michael | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/01/2025 | |
| Madrigal-Velasquez, Kristina | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/01/2025 | |
| Bauder, Kelly | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 03/25/2026 | |
| Bauder, Madison | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 03/25/2026 | |
| Bauder, Parker | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 03/25/2026 | |
| Boulware, Steven | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 03/25/2026 | |
| Boulware, Thomas | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 03/25/2026 | |
| Walker, Katie | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 03/25/2026 | |
| Pmg Opco - Austin, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/25/2026 | |
| Priority Management Group, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/25/2026 | |
| Gutierrez, Michael | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/01/2025 | |
| Madrigal-Velasquez, Kristina | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/01/2025 |
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.