2500 Hinkle Drive, Denton, TX 76201 · Denton County · (940) 383-2651
88 certified beds, about 68 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 1986
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 455627 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on September 19, 2025, inspectors cited 10 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 26 health citations since July 2023, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $55,112 in the last three years; the largest was $55,112, and the latest is dated September 19, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.55 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.67 of those hours.
41.3% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Purehealth, an affiliated group of 8 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 26 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident had the right to be free from neglect as defined in this subpart for one (Resident #1) of six residents reviewed for neglect. 1. On [DATE] LVN B failed to notify Resident #1's doctor or hospice provider after she checked Resident #1's BS level of 576; and on [DATE] and [DATE] LVN B failed to notify Resident #1's doctor or hospice provider after she checked Resident #1's BS levels over 600. 2. On [DATE] and [DATE] the facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was given his dayshift dose of his diabetic Metformin medications to prevent his BS level from getting higher and on [DATE] the facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received his dayshift dose of his potassium chloride medication. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure each assessment accurately reflected the resident's status and for each individual who completed a portion of the assessment must sign and certify the accuracy of that portion of the assessment for one (Resident #1) of six residents reviewed for accuracy of assessments. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's admission MDS Assessments was complete and accurate. Resident #1 was a diabetic who took diabetic medications and he had no diabetes diagnosis listed on this assessment. This failure could place all residents at risk of inadequate care if all of their diagnoses were not included in the residents' records, which could result in a decline in the residents' health and psych-social well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, the facility must maintain medical records on each resident that were complete and accurately documented for one (Resident #1) of six residents reviewed for medical records. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's face sheet and care plans were complete and accurate. Resident #1 was diagnosed with diabetes and took diabetic medications and he had no diabetes diagnosis on his facility's EMR records. This failure could place all residents at risk of inadequate care if all of their diagnoses were not included in the resident's EMR records, which could result in a decline in the resident's health and psych-social well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who were incontinent with bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infection for three (Resident #8, Resident #15, and Resident #21) of three residents reviewed for incontinent care. 1. The facility failed to ensure that CNA F performed the right technique during Resident #8's incontinent care on 09/18/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure that CNA F performed the right technique during Resident #15's incontinent care on 09/18/2025. 3. The facility failed to ensure that CNA E performed the right technique during resident #21's incontinent care on 09/18/2025. This failure could place residents at risk for urinary tract infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation ,interview and record reviews the facility failed to ensure informed consent prior to installation. The facility failed to ensure Resident #5, #9, #10, #11, #30, and #46 had physician orders for the pivot assist bars attached to the residents' bed. This failure could place residents at risk of having unnecessary equipment installed on their beds .
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services, including procedures that assured the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals that met the needs of each resident for four (Resident #4, Resident #7, Resident #21, and Resident #61) of twenty residents reviewed for pharmaceutical services. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4 was not self-administering her pain ointment without an assessment on 09/17/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7 was not self-administering some medications without an assessment on 09/17/2025. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #21 was not self-administering her morning medications without an assessment on 09/17/2025. 4. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to, in accordance with State and Federal laws, store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments under proper temperature controls, and permitted only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for eight (Residents #4, #7, #8, #21, #23, #31, #51, and #61) of eighteen residents reviewed for medication storage. 1. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #4's pain ointment was not inside the room on 09/17/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #7's TUMS, eye drops, and oral analgesia were not inside the room on 09/17/2025. 3. The facility failed to ensure that a wound cleanser was not left inside Resident #8's room on 09/17/2025. 4. The facility failed to ensure Resident #21's medication was not left inside the room on 09/17/2025 and 09/18/2025. 5. [...]
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, reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to ensure frozen food items were properly labeled and dated when stored in the freezer. The facility failed to ensure open food products requiring refrigeration were stored appropriately after opening. Failure to store open, perishable food products requiring refrigeration appropriately after opening may lead to the growth of harmful bacteria, increasing the risk of foodborne illness among residents. Tag: F812/N4363S/S= E Surveyor Name(s): Joycelynn [NAME] Supervisor: [NAME]
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 four of fifteen residents (Resident #8, Resident #15, Resident #21, and Resident #37) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA F performed hand hygiene and changed her gloves during Resident #8's incontinent care on 09/18/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure CNA F performed hand hygiene and changed her gloves during Resident #15's incontinent care on 09/18/2025. 3. The facility failed to ensure CNA E performed hand hygiene and changed his gloves during Resident #21's incontinent care on 09/18/2025. 4. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #46) reviewed for dignity. CNA E failed to honor Resident #46's request to adjust the straps wrapped around the resident's leg, which was holding the catheter bag in place, when she advised it was too tight. This failure placed residents at risk of not having their right to a dignified existence and self-determination maintained and led Resident #46 to feeling frustrated and ignored.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident's right to personal privacy during medical treatment for two (Resident #21 and Resident #37) of eight residents reviewed for resident rights. 1. The facility failed to ensure the LVN D closed Resident #21's door while checking her blood sugar on 09/18/2025 2. The facility failed to ensure RN B closed Resident #37's while providing his bolus feeding via g-tube (gastrostomy feeding tube: a tube that is surgically inserted through the skin of the belly and into the stomach) on 09/18/2025. These failures could place the residents at risk of not having their personal privacy maintained while treatment was provided.
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 set forth 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 1 of 3 residents (Resident #10) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #10's usage of a nebulizer was care planned. This failure could place the residents at risk of not receiving the necessary care and services required.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents, who needed respiratory care, were provided such care consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for two of three residents (Resident #10 and #11) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure Resident 10's nebulizer mask was properly stored in a bag when not in use on 09/17/25. The facility failed to ensure Resident 11's nasal canula was properly stored in a bag when not in use on 09/17/25. These failures could place residents at risk for respiratory infection and not having their respiratory needs met.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents' rights to privacy for 15 (#4, #44, #8, #11, #49, #10, #157, #16, #43, #13, #15, #40, #21, #22, #27) of 15 residents reviewed for personal privacy. The facility failed to ensure LPN D locked the computer screen, displaying the names of 15 residents, while LPN D was in a resident's room administering a treatment. This failure could allow residents' protected HIPAA information to be shared with individuals who did not have a need or right to know.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely for 6 (room [ROOM NUMBER], #1111, #1113, #1114, #1115, and #1116) of 12 resident rooms and the facility's high traffic areas reviewed for cleanliness and sanitization. The facility failed to ensure that Resident Rooms #1109, #1111, #1113, #1114, #1115, and #1116 were thoroughly cleaned and sanitized. This failure could place residents at risk of living in an unclean and unsanitary environment which could lead to a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, 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 set forth 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 a resident for three (Resident #9, Resident #15, and Resident #106) of eight residents reviewed for Care Plans. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #9 was care planned for indwelling Foley catheter. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #15 were care planned for oxygen administration. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #106 were care planned for oxygen administration. These failures could place the residents at risk of not receiving the necessary care and services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure food was stored, prepared, distributed, and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen, reviewed for food storage, labeling, dating, and kitchen sanitation. 1. The facility failed to ensure the ice machine and the ice scoop holder in the kitchen area, was thoroughly cleaned. 2. The facility failed to ensure expired foods in the facility's refrigerator and freezer were discarded according to guidelines. 3. The facility failed to ensure foods in the refrigerator and freezer were properly sealed from air-borne contaminations. 4. The Dietary Manager failed to properly wear a beard covering while breakfast was being prepared and served, in the kitchen area. 5. The facility failed to place a cover on top of the tea dispenser. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased 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 and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections for four (Resident #7, Resident #29, Resident #39, and Resident #40) of fifteen residents observed for Infection Control. 1. The facility failed to ensure that CNA C performed hand hygiene while providing incontinent care to Resident #7 and Resident #39. 2. The facility failed to ensure that CNA B would not lower the catheter bag to the floor before transferring Resident #29. 3. The facility failed to ensure that LPN D perform hand hygiene during Resident #40's wound care. These failures could place the residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for one (Resident #19) of thirteen residents reviewed for dignity. The facility failed to treat Resident #19 with dignity and promote enhancement of her quality of life when the resident was not provided a privacy bag for her catheter bag. This failure placed residents at risk of not having their right to a dignified existence maintained.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences for two (Resident #4 and Resident #23) of thirteen residents reviewed for reasonable accommodation of needs. The facility failed to ensure the call light system in Resident #4 and Resident #23's rooms were in a position that was accessible to the residents. This failure could place the residents at risk of being unable to obtain assistance when needed and help in the event of an emergency.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for one (Resident #27) of six residents reviewed for Accuracy of Assessments. The facility failed to ensure Resident #27's Quarterly MDS Assessment accurately reflected that Resident #27 was on oxygen therapy. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving care and services to meet their needs, diminished function of health, and regressions in their overall health.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure that 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 (Residents #37) of 6 residents reviewed for (ADLs) care provided to dependent residents. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #37 received scheduled showers for his days scheduled, nor had had the resident received any unscheduled showers reviewed since the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #37's toes were trimmed since admitting to the facility on [DATE]. These failures placed the resident at risk of not receiving necessary services to maintain good personal hygiene and decreased self- esteem.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents, who needed respiratory care, were provided such care consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for two (Residents #27 and Resident #106 ) of eight residents reviewed for Respiratory Care. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #27's breathing mask used for nebulization was properly stored. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #106's nasal cannula (flexible tube used to deliver oxygen to the nose through two prongs) was properly stored. These failures could place the residents at risk for respiratory infection and not having their respiratory needs met.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that two (Resident #19 and Resident #48) of five residents were provided medications and/or biologicals and pharmaceutical services to meet their needs. The facility failed to ensure MA re-ordered medications in a timely manner for Resident #19 (Torsemide 20 mg) and Resident #48 (Solifenacin 5 mg). This failure could place the residents at risk of not receiving medications as ordered by the physician.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure food was stored, prepared, distributed and served in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen reviewed for kitchen sanitation. The facility failed to ensure foods in the facility's dry storage area, refrigerator, and freezer were stored and dated according to guidelines. The facility failed to ensure that staff was wearing the proper head coverings when serving food. The facility failed to ensure staff wore gloves when preparing food and remove, wash hands and doff new gloves during kitchen task changes according to guideline. These failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain essential kitchen equipment in safe operating condition for the facility's only kitchen reviewed for essential equipment. 1. The facility failed to report a damaged baffle (rubber guard in disposal) to Maintenance director per guidelines of the facility. These failures could place residents who had their meals prepared in the facility kitchen at risk of having delayed services, staff injuries, and kitchen equipment malfunction, and serve resident meals in safe operating condition.
8 fire safety citations on file: 1 on September 19, 2025, 7 on July 20, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| September 19, 2025 | Fine | $55,112 |
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) | 3.55 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.67 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.16 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.77 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.11 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 41.3% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 46.2% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 2 |
CMS expects 3.67 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 3.70 on weekdays and 3.16 on weekends, 15% 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 4.33 in April to June 2025 to 3.55 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 | 3.55 | 0.67 | 3.70 | 3.16 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 68 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.83 | 0.84 | 3.91 | 3.63 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 58 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 4.40 | 1.01 | 4.59 | 3.93 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 55 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 4.33 | 0.87 | 4.59 | 3.68 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 59 |
| 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 | 8.4 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.3 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 9.5 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.4 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 30.6 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 9.7 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 4.3 | 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 Denton Village by Purehealth's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it better than the national rate (60.1% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
60.1% 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. 209 eligible stays.
11.4% 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. 230 eligible stays.
6.8% 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. 117 eligible stays.
70.5% 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. 112 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. 159 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. 159 residents counted.
83.9% 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. 62 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: DV OPS DENTON LLC. CMS links this home to Purehealth, a group of 8 nursing homes averaging 3.5 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dv Ops Denton LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 11/01/2024 |
| Kccj1 Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 11/01/2024 | |
| Lbei Holdings LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 11/01/2024 | |
| Overhead Ops Investments III LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 11/01/2024 | |
| Bell, Kevin | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 11/01/2024 | |
| Campion, Robert | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 11/01/2024 | |
| Narreddy, Neelima | Corporate director | Individual | 11/01/2024 | |
| Management McOa LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 11/01/2024 | |
| Jones, Brenda | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/12/2025 | |
| Narreddy, Neelima | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/01/2024 | |
| Legends Pharmacy III Services LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/01/2024 | |
| Management McOa LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 11/01/2024 | |
| Ppsg Consulting Services LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/31/2024 | |
| Jones, Brenda | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/12/2025 | |
| Narreddy, Neelima | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/01/2024 |
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.