4150 College St., Beaumont, TX 77707 · Jefferson County · (409) 842-2244
50 certified beds, about 41 residents a day · Government - Hospital district · Medicare and Medicaid since 1997
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 675695 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on August 6, 2025, inspectors cited 6 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 22 health citations since June 2023, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.52 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.30 of those hours.
55.6% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Health Services Management, an affiliated group of 16 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 22 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the physician was consulted regarding a need to alter treatment for 2 of 13 residents reviewed for notification of changes. (Resident #16 and Resident #24) The facility did not consult with Resident #16's physician about the pattern of low blood pressure over consecutive days and of the blood pressure medication being held for 52 of 60 opportunities in July 2025 or 9 of 12 opportunities for August 2025. The facility did not consult with Resident #24's physician about the pattern of low blood pressure over consecutive days and of the blood pressure medication being held for 7 of 31 opportunities in July 2025 or 3 of 6 opportunities for August 2025. This failure could place residents at risk for complications due to delayed or failed physician intervention.
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 2 of 7 residents (CR #1 and CR #2) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure 20 boxes of Fiberone chocolate donuts that expired 06/08/25, (58 days expired) were removed from use. The facility failed to ensure discharged residents' (CR #1 and CR #2) medications were removed from use. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving medications as ordered by their physicians and exacerbations of their medical conditions.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure any drug regimen irregularities were accurately reported by the pharmacist consultant for 2 of 13 residents reviewed for pharmacy services. (Resident #16 and Resident #24) The Pharmacy Consultant failed to thoroughly review the medication regimen and identify possible and/or actual irregularities in the blood pressure and heart rate for Residents #16 and #24. The failure could place residents at risk of receiving inaccurate administration of medications which could result in possible adverse effects or residents not receiving therapeutic benefits of medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biological were labeled, stored under proper temperature controls and in accordance with currently accepted professional principles for 1 of 1 medication rooms and 1 of 1 medication refrigerators reviewed for storage of medication and biologicals. The facility failed to store medications within recommended temperature range in the medication refrigerator in the medication storage room. The facility failed to ensure that there were not 3-4 inches of ice build-up and no standing water in the medication storage refrigerator. The facility failed to ensure there was no stool specimen comingled with medications and stored in the medication room refrigerator. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the medication error rate was not five percent or greater. The facility had a medication error rate of 10%, based on 3 errors out of 29 opportunities, which involved 1 of 3 residents reviewed (Resident # 18) and 1 of 2 staff (LVN A) reviewed for medication errors. LVN A failed to administer Resident #18's senna (vegetable laxative) 8.6mg, hydromorphone (opioid pain medication used to treat moderate to severe pain) and artificial tears 1 drop to both eyes according to the physician's order. These failures could place residents at risk for decline in health and decreased quality of life.
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 1 of 2 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for infection control. The ADON failed to perform hand hygiene and change gloves while providing wound care to Resident #2's buttock area wound. CNA C failed to perform hand hygiene and change gloves while providing peri-care to Resident #2. These failures could place residents at risk for the spread of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the right to be free from misappropriation of resident property for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for misappropriation of resident property. The facility failed to ensure LVN A and CNA B did not use Resident #1's debit card to pay their electricity bills. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The past noncompliance began on 02/27/25 and ended on 04/09/25. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure placed residents at risk for misappropriation, exploitation, financial and psychosocial distress.
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, which 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 1 of 8 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to develop and implement Resident #2's care plan for falls and fall interventions after he fell and sustained a head laceration on 03/22/25. This failure could place residents at risk for injury from falls.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 2 out of 5 (Resident #3 and Resident #4) residents reviewed for enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) for infection control practices. The ADON failed to follow enhanced barrier precautions during care for Resident #3 who had a Foley catheter and wound. The facility failed to ensure the podiatrist followed enhanced barrier precautions for Resident #4 who had an indwelling medical device (g-tube). The failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination and the spread of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) for 4 of 14 residents (Residents #10, #20, #21, and #24) and failed to establish a system of records of receipt and disposition of all controlled drugs in sufficient detail to enable an accurate reconciliation and drug records were in order and that an account of all controlled drugs was maintained for 1 of 14 residents (Resident #10) to meet the needs of each resident for reviewed for pharmacy services. LVN A did not prepare medications for Resident #21 per the facility policy. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete a significant change MDS assessment within 14 days after the facility determines, or should have determined, that there has been a significant change in the resident's physical or mental condition a significant change of condition for 1 of 14 residents reviewed for assessments. (Resident #25) The facility failed to complete a Significant Change MDS for Resident #25 within 14 days after the resident was admitted to hospice services. This failure could place residents who experienced a significant change in their condition requiring an MDS assessment at risk of not receiving needed services. Findings Included: Record review of a face sheet dated 07/15/24 indicated Resident #25 was a [AGE] year-old-male with a readmission date of 06/20/24 and an admission date of 09/15/22. [...]
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, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices for 1 of 14 residents reviewed for quality of care. (Resident #85) The facility did not assess or obtain orders for a post-surgical incision to Resident #85's left hip. This failure could place the residents at risk of not receiving the care and services to maintain their highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse for 1 of 14 residents (Resident #14) reviewed for resident abuse. The facility did not ensure Resident #14 was free from abuse, as a result Resident #14 was physically assaulted by Resident #138 and was injured. This failure could place residents at risk of physical harm, mental anguish, or emotional distress. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The noncompliance began on 4/9/23 and ended on 4/18/23. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food safety in the facility's only kitchen. The facility failed to ensure: 1. Food items were dated and labeled. 2. Hair restraints were worn appropriately by dietary staff. 3. The microwave was clean and free of food debris. 4. The juice machine spigot was clean. 5. The ice machine was clean and free from debris. These failures could place residents at risk for foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's medical record were complete for 4 of 5 residents (Residents #21, #13, #5 and #18) reviewed for medical records. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #21's medical record contained evidence of education on the influenza vaccine when the vaccine was administered to the resident. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #13's medical record contained evidence of education on the influenza immunization when the vaccine was administered to the resident. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #5's medical record contained evidence of education on the influenza vaccine when the vaccine was administered to the resident. 4. The facility failed to ensure Resident #18's medical record contained evidence of education on the influenza immunization when the vaccine was administered to the resident. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure medical records were maintained in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices on each resident and accurately documented for 1 of 14 residents (Resident #28) reviewed for accuracy of medical records. The facility did not ensure Resident #28's OOH-DNR was dated by the physician. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure an accurate MDS was completed for 2 of 14 residents (Residents #6 and #37) reviewed for MDS assessment accuracy. 1. The facility failed to accurately code weight loss status for Resident #6 on the MDS assessment. 2. The facility failed to accurately document discharge status for Resident #37 on the MDS assessment. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan to meet resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 14 residents (Resident #18) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #18's care plan reflected she had weight loss. This failure could place the residents at increased risk of not having their individual needs met and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to develop, review, and revise a comprehensive care plan of each resident that included measurable objectives and timetables to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs for 1 of 14 residents (Resident #7) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7's care plan was updated and revised to reflect she was no longer on transmission-based precautions. This failure could cause the resident to not receive the correct care impacting the patient's health and/or serious illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure necessary services to maintain grooming and personal hygiene were provided for 2 of 3 residents reviewed for ADLs. (Resident #8 and Resident #27) The facility did not ensure Resident #8, and Resident #27 received nail care. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving services or care, decreased quality of life, and decreased self-esteem.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure safe and sanitary storage of resident's food items for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for personal food safety. (Resident #9) The facility did not implement the personal food policy related to personal refrigerators for Resident #9 by failing to check and remove spoiled items that were unlabeled and undated. This failure could place the residents at risk for food borne illnesses.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe and sanitary environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 1 of 1 residents (Resident #28) reviewed for infection control related to midline dressing changes. LVN G and LVN H failed to maintain aseptic technique (a medical practice and procedure to prevent contamination) during a midline catheter (small tube used to give treatments that is inserted into a vein in your arm and stops in the vein near your armpit) dressing change for Resident #28. This failure could place residents at risk for exposure to blood infection and health complications.
6 fire safety citations on file: 1 on August 6, 2025, 4 on July 17, 2024, 1 on June 14, 2023.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
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) | 3.52 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.30 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.18 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.94 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.28 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 55.6% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | not reported | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.75 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 3.66 on weekdays and 3.18 on weekends, 13% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.54 in April to June 2025 to 3.52 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 | 3.52 | 0.30 | 3.66 | 3.18 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 41 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.48 | 0.28 | 3.56 | 3.26 | 0.1% | 0 of 92 | 34 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.60 | 0.30 | 3.69 | 3.36 | 0.1% | 0 of 92 | 32 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.54 | 0.31 | 3.69 | 3.19 | 0.1% | 0 of 91 | 32 |
| 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 | 25.8 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.0 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 25.6 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.1 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 19.4 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.3 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.1 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for College Street Health Care Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (41.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
41.6% 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. 27 eligible stays.
11.1% 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. 32 eligible stays.
8.5% 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. 25 eligible stays.
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: 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. 12 residents counted.
3.3% this home
Median of homes: Texas0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 30 residents counted.
11.0% 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. 30 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Texas98.5% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 2 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: LIBERTY COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT NO 1. CMS links this home to Health Services Management, a group of 16 nursing homes averaging 3.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liberty County Hospital District No 1 | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 12/01/2014 |
| Health Services Management, Inc. | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 12/01/2014 | |
| Hsmtx/Beaumont, LLC | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 12/01/2014 | |
| Stratton, Charles | Corporate director | Individual | 12/01/2014 | |
| Hsmtx/Beaumont, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 12/01/2014 | |
| McMahon, Michael | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2014 | |
| White, Joshua | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2014 | |
| Baxter, Kevin | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 04/06/2025 | |
| Health Services Management, Inc. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/01/2014 | |
| Hsmtx/Beaumont, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/01/2014 | |
| Desormeaux, Lori | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2014 | |
| McMahon, Michael | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/01/2014 |
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.