2407 West Main St., Clarksville, TX 75426 · Red River County · (903) 427-3821
120 certified beds, about 55 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1991
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 455944 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on February 25, 2026, inspectors cited 6 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 32 health citations since November 2023, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $5,211 in the last three years; the largest was $5,211, and the latest is dated October 5, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 2.80 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.45 of those hours.
32.6% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Focused Post Acute Care Partners, an affiliated group of 25 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 32 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for 3 of 15 residents (Residents #7, #8 and #36) reviewed for accuracy of assessments. 1. The facility failed to accurately complete the MDS assessment to indicate Resident #7's PASRR status was positive. 2. The facility failed to accurately complete the MDS assessment to indicate Resident #8's tobacco use.3. The facility failed to accurately complete the MDS assessment to indicate Resident #36's PASRR status was positive. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving the appropriate care and services to maintain their highest level of well-being.
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 1 medication rooms and 1 of 2 medication carts for 4 of 18 residents reviewed for pharmacy services (Resident #8, #42, #43 and #52). 1. The facility failed to perform an inventory of controlled substances of the medication cart upon transfer of keys between staff.2. The facility failed to ensure expired mediations were removed from all medication carts and medication rooms. These failures could place residents at increase risks of drug diversion and of receiving medications that were not at their intended potency and potential adverse reactions or side effects. 1. [...]
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 2 of 2 residents observed for incontinent care (Residents #5 and #32), for 1 of 1 resident observed for wound care (Resident #5), and 1 of 1 resident for transfers (Resident #32). * CNA F and CNA G used gloves pulled from their pockets, CNA G touched clean items without hand hygiene between glove changes, CNA F did not do hand hygiene between glove changes, and CNA G did not wash her hands before leaving the room when they provided incontinent care and Hoyer lift transfer on Resident #32. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that includes measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs and describes the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 20 residents (Resident #36) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #36's care plan addressed his PASRR positive status. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving appropriate interventions to meet their current needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident's drug regimen was free from unnecessary medications (is a medication used: for excessive duration) for 2 of 5 residents (Residents #5 and #32) reviewed for unnecessary medications. * The facility did not have a stop date for Resident #5's Methenamine Hippurate (antibiotic) * The facility did not have a stop date for Resident #32's Bactrim DS (antibiotic) These failures could place residents at risk for antibiotic resistance infections due to excessive use of antibiotics.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain all mechanical, electrical, and patient care equipment in safe operating condition for 1 of 1 stove in the kitchen reviewed for essential equipment. * The facility did not ensure the gas stove was in safe operating condition. The two right burners would not ignite when the knobs were turned. This failure could place the residents at risk of a fire for not having safe operating equipment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the right to be free from Misappropriation of Resident Property for 6 of 18 residents (Resident #'s 1,2,3,4,5, and 6). 1. The facility failed to prevent the misappropriation of bottle of megace (Resident #1) and (Resident #4), card of Zofran (Resident #5) and (Resident #3), card of Pantoprazole (Resident #6), card of montelukast (no legible name), Nystatin, Xyzal (no legible name), card of Flexeril (no legible name), (CMA H) removed the medication from the nurses' cart, without authorization, for personal gain. 2. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #2 was not subject to financial misappropriation or exploitation from Housekeeper A from the time period 2/11/2025 to 2/17/2025. Housekeeper A accepted cash in the amount of $60 from Resident #2. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. [...]
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 1 of 1 kitchen reviewed for dietary services, and in that: 1) The facility failed to date all food items. 2) Dietary staff failed to dispose of expired foods items 3)The facility failed to ensure proper infection control measures when a resident self-served ice from the ice chest cooler located on Hall 2 on 12/2/2024, 12/03/2024 and 12/04/2024. These failures could place residents at risk for food contamination and foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure the residents' environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #13) reviewed for accident hazards. The facility failed to ensure the cigarettes for Resident #13 were properly secured in the designated locked box behind the nurse's station. The facility failed to ensure Resident #13 was smoking with supervision when she was found outside in the smoking area on 12/04/24 smoking alone. These failures could place residents at risk for injuries.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store all drugs and biologicals in locked compartments under proper temperature controls and permit only authorized personnel to have access to the keys for 1 of 19 residents reviewed for medication storage. (Resident #14). The facility failed to ensure Resident #14's vagisil maximum strength cream (used for vaginal itching), preparation H hemorrhoidal ointment (used for relief of swelling, burning, or pain from hemorrhoids), Asper creme lidocaine roll on (used for pain), fluticasone 50mcg nasal spray (used for allergies), and 2 bottles of Systane eye drops were stored and locked in an area not accessible to unauthorized staff, residents, or visitors. These failures could place residents at risk of injury.
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 3 residents (Residents #17). 1. CNA A and CNA B failed to use enhanced barrier precautions by donning a gown when performing foley care on Resident #17 on 12/03/2024. 2. CNA A and CNA B failed to change their gloves after performing foley care on Resident #17 and touched the resident and clean surfaces on 12/03/2024. These failures could place residents at risk of exposure to communicable diseases, cross-contamination and infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary, and comfortable environment for residents, staff, and the public, for 1 of 19 residents (Resident #14) reviewed for physical environment. The facility failed to ensure Resident #14's bathroom toilet was functioning properly. The facility failed to ensure Resident #14's bathroom toilet was not briskly running or leaking water for her to use safely. This failure could place residents at-risk of falls and further injuries due to an unsafe environment.
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 3 (Resident # 1) residents reviewed for misappropriation of resident property. The facility failed to prevent a drug diversion (misappropriation) of Resident #1's-controlled medications on [DATE], Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen 7.5-325MG (narcotic pain reliever), Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen10-325MG, and Lorazepam (controlled anti-anxiety medication) 0.5 MG, after she expired on [DATE]. The medications were not found. The non-compliance was identified as past non-compliance. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place residents at risk for decreased quality of life, misappropriation of property, misappropriation of physician ordered medications and dignity.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to protect a resident's right to be free from abuse for 2 of 4 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to protect Resident #1 from inappropriate sexual touching by Resident #2. This failure could place residents at risk of for psychosocial harm and a diminished quality of life.
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 in the facility's only kitchen The facility failed to ensure that kitchen staff appropriately restrained their hair with the hairnet. The facility failed to ensure cans were free from damage. These failures could place residents at risk of cross contamination and foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the right to formulate an advanced directive was provided for 3 of 20 residents (Residents #4, #16 and #24) reviewed for advanced directives. 1. The facility did not ensure Resident #4's OOH-DNR included the physician signature and physician date the document was signed. 2. The facility did not ensure Resident #16's OOH-DNR included the witness 2 signature, physician license number, and physician date the document was signed. 3. The facility did not ensure Resident #24's OOH-DNR included the witness 1 signature. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to ensure that the resident environment remains as free of accident hazards as is possible and each resident receives adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 6 of 20 residents (Resident #8, Resident #13, Resident #19, Resident #25, Resident #47, and Resident #52) reviewed for accidents and supervision. The facility did not ensure Resident #52 smoked in the designated smoking area while being supervised during the smoke break. The facility did not ensure PTA F used the gait belt appropriately while ambulating Resident #25. The facility failed to ensure the safety of Resident #13 by not moving the Resident to another location/bed prior to removing/working on the bed. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure the medical record of each resident was accurately documented in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices for 3 of 20 residents (Residents #4, #9 and #24) reviewed for medical records. 1. The facility did not ensure Resident #4's behaviors were adequately monitored regarding her antianxiety medication. The facility did not ensure Resident #4's side effects were adequately monitored regarding her antianxiety, antidepressant and antipsychotic medications. 2. The facility did not ensure Resident #9's behaviors were adequately monitored regarding her antianxiety medication. The facility did not ensure Resident #9's side effects were adequately monitored regarding her antianxiety and antidepressant medications. 3. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents were free of significant medication errors for 1 of 9 residents reviewed for insulin administration. (Resident #52) The facility did not ensure LVN P and RN Q administered Resident #52's Humalog (insulin lispro) KwikPen (insulin medication) according to the manufacturer's instructions. This failure could place the resident at risk of medical complications and not receiving the therapeutic effects of their medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure that all drugs and biologicals used in the facility were labeled and stored in accordance with professional standards for 3 of 20 residents (Resident #8, Resident #9, and Resident #40) and 1 of 1 empty resident's room reviewed for drugs and biologicals. The facility failed to ensure Resident #8's Afrin (nasal spray medication) was stored properly. The facility failed to ensure Resident #40's Azelastine (nasal spray medication) was stored properly. The facility did not ensure a Plavix pill (antiplatelet) was stored in a locked container and original packaging. The facility did not ensure Resident #9's multivitamins, ear drops, and triple antibiotic ointment were properly safe and secured. These failures could place residents at risk of medication misuse and diversion.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide food that was palatable and served at an appetizing temperature 1 of 1 lunch meal reviewed for palatability and temperature. The facility failed to provide palatable food served at an appetizing temperature or taste to Resident #41, Resident #28, and Resident #19 who complained the food was served cold and did not taste good. The facility failed to ensure the Dietary Manager followed the recipe for pureeing the Swiss steak and California Blend Vegetables (the lunch menu). This failure could place residents who ate food from the kitchen at risk of weight loss, altered nutritional status, and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure each resident received and the facility provided at least three meals daily, at regular times comparable to normal mealtimes in the community or in accordance with resident needs, preferences, requests and plan of care for 2 of 2 meals (Lunch on 10/30/2023 AND 10/31/2023) observed for frequency of meals. The facility failed to serve the 10/30/2023 and 10/31/2023 lunch meal on time at the scheduled time. This failure could place residents at risk for decreased meal satisfaction, decreased intake, loss of appetite, side effects from medication given without food, and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, 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 1 of 2 residents (Resident #28) and 4 of 4 staff (CNA G, CNA H, Community Cleanliness Provider O and Clinical Reimbursement Coordinator) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA G and CNA H changed gloves and performed hand hygiene while providing incontinent care to Resident #28. The facility failed to ensure CNA G and CNA H did not touch the multi-use wipes container with their dirty gloves. 2. The facility failed to ensure the Clinical Reimbursement Coordinator sanitized her hands between each resident meal tray while passing meal trays on Hall 1. 3. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to promote antibiotic stewardship by ensuring the appropriate use of antibiotic therapy and providing written rationale, by the provider, when an antibiotic was used despite criteria, to determine the appropriate the use of an antibiotic for 3 of 3 residents (Residents #13, #36, and #44) reviewed for antibiotic use. The facility failed to ensure Residents #13, #36, and #44 had documented signs and symptoms, appropriate lab work, and diagnoses to support the use of prescribed antibiotics. This failure could place residents receiving antibiotics at risk for unnecessary antibiotic use, inappropriate antibiotic use, and increased antibiotic-resistant infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to follow their own established smoking policy for the facility's only smoking area and 1 of 12 residents (Resident #52) reviewed for smoking policies. 1. The facility did not ensure Resident #52 smoked in the designated smoking area with appropriate supervision. 2. The facility did not ensure cigarette butts were disposed of in metal containers in the smoking area. 3. The facility did not ensure plastic trash was placed in the appropriate trash containers in the smoking area. These failures could place residents at risk of an unsafe smoking environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and provide care in a manner that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #25 and Resident #159) reviewed for resident rights. 1. The facility did not ensure CNA B knocked, introduced herself, and explained the procedure prior to entering Resident #25's room and providing care. 2. The facility did not ensure CNA B knocked prior to entering Resident #159's room.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences for 1 of 20 residents (Resident #10) reviewed for reasonable accommodation of needs. The facility did not ensure Resident #10's call light was within reach. This failure could place residents at risk for unmet needs and decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and comfortable homelike environment for 1 of 20 residents (Resident #28) reviewed for environment. The facility failed to ensure Resident #28's door was properly functioning. This failure could place residents at risk for an uncomfortable, unhomelike environment, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure an accurate MDS was completed for 1 of 20 residents (Resident's #14) reviewed for MDS assessment accuracy. 1. The facility did not ensure Resident #14's most recent MDS assessment reflected his hospice services during the 14-day look-back period. This failure could place residents at risk for not receiving care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to develop or implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan to meet resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs identified in the comprehensive assessment for 2 of 20 residents reviewed for care plans. (Resident #5 and Resident #13) 1. The facility did not implement Resident #5's care plan or accurately reflect her diet preferences. 2. The facility failed to develop and implement a care plan for Resident #13's Hospice care services. These failures could place residents at risk of not having individual needs met and a decreased quality of life.
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 5 residents reviewed for ADLs. (Resident #41 and Resident #210) 1. The facility did not ensure Resident #41 received nail care. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #210 received his shower as scheduled. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving services or care, decreased quality of life, and decreased self-esteem.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services, including procedures that assure the accurate dispensing and administering of all drugs and biologicals to meet the needs of each resident for 1 of 20 residents (Residents #28) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #28 received insulin as prescribed. The facility failed to ensure Resident #28's blood sugar was rechecked in an hour. These failures could place residents at risk for hospitalizations, not receiving services to meet their needs, and a decreased quality of life.
8 fire safety citations on file: 2 on February 25, 2026, 5 on December 4, 2024, 1 on November 2, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| October 5, 2024 | Fine | $5,211 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Texas | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 2.80 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.45 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.42 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.62 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.73 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 32.6% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 28.6% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.84 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 2.95 on weekdays and 2.42 on weekends, 18% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 2.97 in April to June 2025 to 2.80 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 2.80 | 0.45 | 2.95 | 2.42 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 55 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 2.89 | 0.41 | 3.01 | 2.56 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 54 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 2.79 | 0.38 | 2.90 | 2.50 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 57 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 2.97 | 0.41 | 3.09 | 2.68 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 56 |
| 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.
Trains nurse aides: this home runs a state-approved CNA program (state list: HHSC Approved NATCEP Providers, as of October 6, 2026). A nursing home cannot charge aides it employs, or has offered a job, for state-approved training (42 CFR 483.152(c)). See Focused Care of Clarksville CNA training on CareerFunded, our sister site for career training.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Texas, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.03 | $16.97 to $20.71 | 88,680 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $29.92 | $27.46 to $32.89 | 57,560 |
| Registered nurses | $46.14 | $38.06 to $50.53 | 271,380 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Texas | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 20.3 | 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 | 2.0 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.4 | 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 | 13.4 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.7 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 5.9 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.1 | 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 Focused Care at Clarksville's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (43.2% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
43.2% 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. 52 eligible stays.
10.6% 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. 62 eligible stays.
9.2% 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. 44 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. 17 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. 24 residents counted.
10.0% 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. 24 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. 12 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: CHAMBERS COUNTY PUBLIC HOSPITAL DISTRICT NO. 1. CMS links this home to Focused Post Acute Care Partners, a group of 25 nursing homes averaging 2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chambers County Public Hospital District No. 1 | Direct ownership interest | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Abernathy, Mary | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Humphrey, Eric | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Legg, Stephen | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| McKenzie, Mark | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 05/01/2024 | |
| Tinnerman, Linda | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 12/15/2020 | |
| Turner, Leslie | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 01/01/2024 | |
| Cooper, Kimberly | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/29/2024 | |
| Chambers County Public Hospital District No. 1 | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Focused Post Acute Care Partners LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Focused Post Acute Care Partners Management, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Fpacp Clarksville LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 05/01/2021 | |
| Brown, Ruth | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Castle, Lisa | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/27/2023 | |
| Conley, Shawn | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Cooper, Kimberly | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/29/2024 | |
| McKenzie, Mark | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Muthappa, Deepak | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Newton, Elizabeth | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 02/22/2024 | |
| Strubbe, Loretta | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Weiselogel, Melisa | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 05/18/2021 | |
| Focused Post Acute Care Partners LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/11/2025 | |
| Focused Post Acute Care Partners Management, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/11/2025 | |
| Fpacp Clarksville LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/11/2025 | |
| Brown, Ruth | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 06/11/2025 | |
| Castle, Lisa | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 03/27/2023 | |
| Conley, Shawn | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| McKenzie, Mark | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Muthappa, Deepak | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Strubbe, Loretta | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2021 | |
| Weiselogel, Melisa | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/18/2021 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Texas. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.