920 E Fm 1187, Crowley, TX 76036 · Tarrant County · (817) 297-5600
120 certified beds, about 97 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 2007
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 676176 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 5, 2025, inspectors cited 5 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 17 health citations since March 2023, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 3 fines totaling $18,470 in the last three years; the largest was $8,824, and the latest is dated August 15, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.47 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.36 of those hours.
53.5% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Hmg Healthcare, an affiliated group of 31 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 17 health citations on file.
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 and services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being as required for 1 of 9 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for care plans. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records that were complete and accurately documented for 15 of 15 residents (Residents #7, #25, #31, #36, #38, #41, #74, #85, #90, #92, #201, #204, #205, #206, and #208) reviewed for medical record accuracy. 1. CNA F documented her care for Residents #7, #25, #31, #36, #38, #41, #74, #85, #90, #92, #201, #204, #205, #206, and #208 under LVN C's computer credentials on 06/03/25 and 06/04/25 2. CNA G documented her care for Resident's #7, #25, #31, #36, #38, #41, #74, #85, #90, #92, #201, #204, #205, #206, and #208 under CNA D's computer credentials on 06/03/25. These failures could place the residents at risk of inaccurate documentation of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the quality assessment and assurance committee (QAA) met at least quarterly and consisted of the required members for 11 of 11 quarterly QAA meetings. The facility failed to ensure the Medical Director, or his/her designee, attended 11 QAA committee meetings held on 06/11/24, 07/15/24, 08/08/24, 09/12/24, 10/10/24, 12/13/24, 01/07/25, 02/11/25, 03/10/25, 04/10/25, and 05/13/25. This failure could place residents at risk for quality deficiencies being unidentified and with no appropriate guidance developed or implemented.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #75) reviewed for accidents. The facility failed to remove Resident #75's fall mat, next to her bed, when she would take a few steps to her bedside commode, which posed a trip hazard. This failure could place residents at risk for serious injury or harm, decline in health, and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who is fed by enteral means receives the appropriate treatment and services to prevent complications of enteral feeding for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #76) reviewed for enteral feeding. The facility failed to have a physician's order for an abdominal binder that was being used to secure/protect the resident from pulling out her g-tube. This failure could place residents at risk for diminished quality of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to permit each resident to remain in the facility, and not transfer or discharge the resident from the facility unless the discharge was necessary for the resident's welfare and the resident's needs could not be met in the facility for two of nine residents (Residents #1 and #2) reviewed for discharge requirements. The facility failed to ensure documentation was made by the physician for the basis of Resident #1's discharge and/or the specific resident needs that could not be met by the facility. These failures could place residents at risk of being discharged without a safe and effective transition of care, an accurate reason for discharge and inaccurate information communicated to the receiving health care institution or provider.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the resident, resident representative and send a copy to the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman, of the transfer or discharge and the reasons for the move in writing and in a language and manner they understood for one of nine residents (Resident #1) reviewed for discharge rights. 1. The facility initiated an emergency discharge for Resident #1 due to safety concerns by notifying the resident's RP by phone only and not in writing. The facility failed to provide Resident #1 an emergency discharge letter with the required information and resources, including discharge instructions with plan of care. 2. The facility failed to notify the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman by phone or in writing of Resident #1's discharge. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide and document sufficient preparation and orientation to residents to ensure safe and orderly transfer or discharge from the facility for two of nine (Residents #1 and #2) residents reviewed for discharges. The facility failed to provide and document that Residents #1 and #2 were given sufficient preparation and orientation prior to discharging the residents from the facility. These failures could place residents at risk of being discharged without a safe and effective transition of care, an accurate reason for discharge and inaccurate information communicated to the receiving health care institution or provider.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, 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 grooming and personal hygiene for 3 (Residents #82, #37, and #26) of 5 residents reviewed for ADL care. The facility failed to ensure Residents #82, #37, and #26 were shaved regularly, and failed to keep their fingernails trimmed, according to their wishes. This failure placed residents at the facility at risk of diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop, implement, and maintain an effective training program for 8 of 12 staff (CNA D, CNA E, CNA F, MA G, CNA H, RN I, LVN C, LVN J,) reviewed for training, in that: The facility failed to ensure Trainings-Resident Rights, Dementia, HIV, Falls, Restraints, and ANE (Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation) were completed during orientation and prior to start date. These failures could place residents at-risk for abuse and neglect due to lack of training.
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 included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, mental, and psychosocial needs that were identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 20 residents (Resident #59) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to develop a care plan with measurable objectives and timeframes to address Resident #59' non-compliance with keeping a device in her hand for contractures. This failure could place residents at risk of receiving inadequate interventions not individualized to their care needs.
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 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for medication administration. The ADON failed to administer medications for Resident #1, leaving the cup with two pills on the resident's shelf in the room. This failure placed residents at risk of not receiving medications as prescribed, decreased therapeutic effects of the medications, risk for drug diversion, delay in medication administration and worsening of their medical conditions.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were stored securely for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) on one hall reviewed for storage of medications. The ADON failed to administer medications for Resident #1, leaving the cup with two pills on the resident's shelf in the room. This failure could place residents at risk of consuming unsafe medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure medical records were accurately documented in accordance with accepted professional standards for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #41) reviewed for medical records. The facility failed to ensure nursing documentation was accurate for Resident #41. This failure could lead to errors in treatment based on incorrect information.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff followed an infection control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for 2 of 4 residents (Residents #41 and #42) reviewed for infection control. MA A failed to sanitize a reusable blood pressure cuff between Resident #41 and #42. This failure could place residents at risk of transmitting disease from one resident to another resident.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 (Resident #1) of 3 residents reviewed for accidents. The PT failed to ensure Resident #1's body, to include her lower extremities, were positioned properly during a transfer using a sliding board, which is a rigid board used to bridge the gap between two surfaces to assist with transferring from one surface to another. During set-up of the transfer, the PT lowered the bed on or against the resident's foot causing a laceration that required 13 sutures. This failure could place residents at risk for serious injury or harm, decline in health, and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain medical records that were complete and accurate on four of six residents (Residents #1, #2, #3, #4) reviewed for resident records. The facility failed to ensure the medical records for Residents #1, #2, #3, and #4 included physician orders and consents for placement in the facility's secure unit as specified in the facility's policy. This failure could place residents at risk of involuntary seclusion.
5 fire safety citations on file: 3 on May 16, 2024, 2 on March 16, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| August 15, 2024 | Fine | $4,823 |
| August 15, 2024 | Fine | $4,823 |
| January 24, 2024 | Fine | $8,824 |
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) | 3.47 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.36 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.96 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.18 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.92 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 53.5% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 40.0% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 4.03 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 3.67 on weekdays and 2.96 on weekends, 19% 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 3.57 in April to June 2025 to 3.47 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 | 3.47 | 0.36 | 3.67 | 2.96 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 97 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.51 | 0.39 | 3.69 | 3.05 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 96 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.62 | 0.42 | 3.81 | 3.14 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 99 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.57 | 0.37 | 3.80 | 3.00 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 99 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Texas, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.33 | 0.40 | 3.50 | 2.93 | 2.2% | 0.7% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Texas, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.03 | $16.97 to $20.71 | 88,680 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $29.92 | $27.46 to $32.89 | 57,560 |
| Registered nurses | $46.14 | $38.06 to $50.53 | 271,380 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Texas | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.8 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 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 | 2.6 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 9.8 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.2 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 14.6 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 16.2 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 10.9 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.8 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.1 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Crowley 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 (56.7% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
56.7% 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. 49 eligible stays.
12.7% 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. 70 eligible stays.
6.0% 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. 53 eligible stays.
59.7% this home
Median of homes: Texas57.3% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 62 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. 82 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. 82 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. 5 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: WINNIE-STOWELL HOSPITAL DISTRICT. CMS links this home to Hmg Healthcare, a group of 31 nursing homes averaging 3.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rollo, Jeffery | Corporate officer | Individual | 11/01/2012 | |
| Cibc Bank USA | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 04/01/2018 | |
| Balsamo, Krystal | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/29/2021 | |
| Bowers, Cindy | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/06/2024 | |
| Culp, Roland | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Daspit, Laurence | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Dohn, William | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/27/2019 | |
| Matlock, Joe | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/29/2023 | |
| Murrell, Edward | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2017 | |
| Pico, Ana | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Prince, Derek | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Reinarz, Christian | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/13/2024 | |
| Rollo, Jeffery | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/01/2012 | |
| Stramecki, Anthony | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2017 | |
| Vratis, Kacey | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/01/2023 | |
| Way, George | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 09/01/2023 | |
| Prince, Derek | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 02/19/2026 | |
| Cibc Bank USA | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2018 | |
| Hmg Services LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2018 | |
| Trinity Md PLLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2022 | |
| Zions Bancorporation | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2021 | |
| Balsamo, Krystal | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/29/2021 | |
| Bowers, Cindy | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/06/2024 | |
| Culp, Roland | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Daspit, Laurence | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Dohn, William | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 03/27/2019 | |
| Dollahite, Henry | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2022 | |
| Matlock, Joe | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/29/2023 | |
| Pico, Ana | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Prince, Derek | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Reinarz, Christian | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/13/2024 | |
| Stanbridge, Norma | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2022 |
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.