1420 McCreary Rd, Wylie, TX 75098 · Dallas County · (972) 442-6776
128 certified beds, about 90 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 2008
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 676192 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on April 23, 2026, inspectors cited 5 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 38 health citations since December 2023, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $31,959 in the last three years; the largest was $18,179, and the latest is dated December 6, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.64 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.58 of those hours.
31.3% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Stonegate Senior Living, an affiliated group of 24 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 38 health citations on file.
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 5 of 7 (Residents #1, #2, #3, #4, and #5) reviewed for pharmacy services.1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was not administered a discontinued medication when she was administered the anti-anxiety medication, lorazepam 0.5 mg, on 05/29/26 after it had been discontinued on 04/30/26. 2. The facility failed to ensure accurate documentation and proper administration for the use of Compound ABH Gel for Resident #2 (06/02/26, 06/04/26, 06/08/26, 06/10/26, 06/11/26) and the use of Clonazepam 0.5 mg for Resident #3 on 06/02/26. 3. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who used psychotropic drugs received gradual dose reductions, and behavioral interventions, unless clinically contraindicated, in an effort to discontinue these drugs for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility failed to ensure a gradual dose reduction was considered for Resident #2's antidepressant, trazadone, in January 2026 after she began the medication in July 2025. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of receiving unnecessary psychotropic medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents received proper treatment and care to maintain good foot health by providing foot care and treatment, in accordance with professional standards of practice, including to prevent complications from the resident's medical condition for 1 of 16 (Resident #83) reviewed for foot care. The facility failed to ensure foot care, specifically trimming of toenails, was provided for Resident #83. This failure could place residents at risk for poor personal hygiene, odors and a decline in their quality of life .
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed ensure a resident who was incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections and to restore continence to the extent possible for one of two residents (Resident #6) reviewed for catheter care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #6 had physician's orders for catheter care after he admitted to the facility with a suprapubic catheter. This failure could place residents at risk for infections and improper treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure parenteral fluids were administered consistent with professional standards of practice and in accordance with physician orders, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the resident's goals and preferences for 1 of 2 residents (Resident #85) reviewed for intravenous fluids . 1. The facility failed to change and maintain the integrity of the dressing on Resident #85's midline catheter (an intravenous (IV) catheter inserted into a peripheral vein in the upper arm, with the tip positioned near the axilla, used for intermediate-term IV therapy) per professional standards.2. The facility failed to have physician orders to change Resident #85's midline catheter dressing, flushing, and to monitor for infection infiltration. These failures could place residents at risk for infections and cross-contamination.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the attending physician documented in the resident's medical record that the identified drug irregularity had been reviewed and what, if any, action had been taken to address it and if there was to be no change in the medication, the attending physician should document his or her rationale in the resident's medical record for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for psychotropic medications. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2's attending physician addressed the pharmacist's recommendation to consider a gradual dose reduction. Resident #2 had been receiving trazadone (an antidepressant) 100 MG every day since 07/31/25. 2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for ADL care provided to dependent residents. Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for ADL care provided to dependent residents. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received showers consistently for June and July 2025. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving necessary services to maintain good personal hygiene, skin integrity, or decreased self- esteem. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as was possible for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accident hazards. Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as was possible for 1 of 4 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accident hazards. The facility failed to ensure CNA D did not transfer Resident #1 using a Hoyer lift (a mechanical lift used to transfer an individual with limited mobility) by herself on 07/16/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needed respiratory care, was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for two of 4 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for respiratory care. Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who needed respiratory care, was provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' goals and preferences for two of 4 residents (Resident #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for respiratory care. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased 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 to meet the needs of each resident for one of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pharmaceutical services. Based 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 to meet the needs of each resident for one of 3 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pharmaceutical services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's Farxiga medication was in stock. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving medication as ordered by the physician and having high glucose levels.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident representative had the right to exercise the resident's rights to the extent those rights are delegated to the representative for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to obtain consent from Resident #1's RR, prior to administering an antibiotic medication which resident was allergic to. This failure could place residents at risk of not having their preferred responsible party represent them in care decisions. Findings Include: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet revealed an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted [DATE]. Resident #1's face sheet identified her representative was a family member, RR. Resident #1's RR was listed as medical power of attorney. Resident #1 had diagnoses which included: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident for one of three residents (Resident #1) reviewed for pharmacy services. 1) The facility failed to update Resident #1's allergy list completely when they manually transcribed the information into their new operating system. 2) The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was not administered Bactrim (Sulfa drug) on 3/13/25 when Resident #1 had an allergy to Sulfa. These failures could place residents at risk of receiving medications they have allergies to which could contribute to adverse reactions resulting in a decline in health and/or hospitalization. Findings Included: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to maintain medical records on each resident that were accurately documented for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for accuracy of records. The facility failed to add one of Resident #1's medication allergies, Sulfa, into the new operating system when they transferred the information. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving medications as ordered which could cause a decline in the resident's overall health. Findings Included: Record review of Resident #1's face sheet revealed an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted [DATE]. Resident #1's face sheet identified her representative was a family member. Resident #1 had 37 allergies listed which included: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide the right to personal privacy and confidentiality which includes privacy during medical treatment and confidentiality of medical records for four (Resident #31, Resident #42, Resident #79, and Resident #91) of eighteen residents reviewed for Privacy and Confidentiality. 1. The facility failed to ensure RN E and RN F closed the door while administering Resident #79's breathing treatment on 01/23/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure RN E closed the door while administering Resident #91's medication through g-tube on 01/23/2025. 3. The facility failed to ensure MA I did not leave Resident #31's and Resident #42's health information on top of the medication cart unattended on 01/23/25. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper handling of the ice to prevent contamination and the potential for waterborne illness by one CNA (CNA D) out of four staff attending to the residents during lunch time. The facility failed to ensure CNA D did not put the ice scooper on the bowl of ice while preparing drinks for the residents during lunch time on 01/22/2025. This failure could place the residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected the resident's status for two (Resident #20 and Resident #49) of eight residents reviewed for Accuracy of Assessments. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #20's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] accurately reflected that the resident had an external catheter (non-invasive device used to manage urinary incontinence) and was on oxygen therapy. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #49's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] accurately reflected that the resident was receiving Hospice Care (end of life care). This failure could place the resident at risk for not receiving care and services to meet their needs, diminished function of health, and regressions in their overall health.
Inspectors wroteBased observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who were incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infection and to restore continence to the extent possible for one of (Resident #20) two residents reviewed for Incontinent Care. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #20's external catheter was properly stored on 01/22/2025. This failure could place residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of urinary tract infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, 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 (Resident #49 and Resident #64) of five residents reviewed for Respiratory Care. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #49's suction machine and the Yankauer suction tip (oral suctioning tool used to remove fluid and secretions from the airway) connected to it was properly stored on 01/22/2025. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #64's nasal cannula (flexible tube used to deliver oxygen to the nose through two prongs) connected to the oxygen concentrator was properly stored on 01/22/2025. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse for one of five residents (Resident #1) reviewed for abuse. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was free from sexual abuse. Resident #1 was cognitively impaired and had diagnoses of Alzheimer's. Resident #1 was sexually assaulted by a visitor whom she did not know, on 11/28/24. An IJ was identified on 12/05/24. The IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 4:04 PM. While the IJ was removed on 12/06/24, the facility remained out of compliance at a scope of isolated and a severity level of potential for more than minimum harm to resident health or safety because all staff had not been trained on the plan of removal. This failure placed residents at risk for abuse, mental anguish, and emotional distress.
Inspectors wroteBased observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents who were incontinent of bladder received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infection for one of one resident (Resident #1) reviewed for Incontinent Care. The facility failed to ensure CNA G did not use the same wipes used to clean Resident #5's lower abdomen to clean the resident's perineal area on 12/03/2024. This failure could place residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of urinary tract infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the medications for two of two residents (Resident #2 and Resident #3) were stored in locked compartments and permit only authorized personnel to have access to the keys. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #6's bottle of Nature Made Fish Oil was not left on resident's recliner on 12/03/2024. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7's Equate Lubricant eye drops was not left on top of the resident's overbed table on 12/03/2024. 3. The facility failed to ensure Resident #7's bottle of Allegra tablets was not left on top of the resident's overbed table on 12/03/2024. These failures could place the residents at risk of not receiving medications, accidental overdose, or misuse of medications.
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 one of one resident (Resident #1) reviewed for Infection Control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA G changed her gloves and performed hand hygiene while providing incontinent care to Resident #5 on 12/03/2024. 2. The facility failed to ensure CNA G did not hang Resident #1's new brief on the wooden frame of the bed on 12/03/2024. These failures could place residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that the residents environment remained free of accident and hazards for 2 of 6 residents (Resident #12 and #97) reviewed for accident and hazard free environment. The facility failed to ensure a water leak in Resident #12's bathroom was properly repaired, and the Resident had an accident as a result of the continued water leak. Resident #12 had a hematoma to the front right side of head and a and a bruise to her right arm. The facility failed to prevent employees from bringing their personal dogs into the facility and allowed them to roam unsupervised in the facility's courtyard, which resulted in Resident #97 sustaining an injury. These deficient practices could place the residents at risk for harm, or serious injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, 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, refrigerators, and freezer were labeled and dated according to guidelines and in a sanitary manner. The facility failed to ensure damaged food can was discarded according to guidelines. The facility failed to ensure the Dietary Manager wore a hair cover for his head. The facility failed to ensure the kitchen was clean and sanitized. These failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination and other foodborne illnesses.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, 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 four (Resident #91, Resident #92, Resident #93, and Resident #48) of eight residents reviewed for reasonable accommodation of needs. The facility failed to ensure the call light system in Resident #91, #92, #93 and #48'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 provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely for areas in the facility for 12 (Resident #'s 5, 6, 13, 19, 35, 42, 48, 49, 71, 81, 83, and 101's) of 24 resident rooms observed for a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment. The facility failed to ensure that Resident #'s 5, 6, 13, 19, 35, 42, 48, 49, 71, 81, 83, and 101's rooms were cleaned, sanitized, and maintained. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of infections and living in an uncomfortable environment leading to a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, 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 3 of 6 residents (Residents #49, #50, and #111) reviewed for ADLs care provided to dependent residents. The facility failed to ensure Residents #49, #50, and #111 received showers consistently based on records reviewed for November 2023. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving necessary services to maintain good personal hygiene, skin integrity, or decreased self- esteem. Findings Included: Record review of Resident #49's Face Sheet, dated 12/08/23, revealed she was an [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. Relevant diagnoses included Alzheimer's disease (severe memory loss), and difficulty in walking. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that three(Resident #4, Resident #91, and Resident #25) of six residents were provided pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of the residents. The facility failed to ensure CMA W re-ordered medications in a timely manner for Resident # 4 Resident #91, and Resident #25. This failure placed the residents at risk of not receiving medications as ordered by the physician.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the medication error rate was less than 5% for four medication administration errors identified out of 42 opportunities for one (Resident #26) out of five residents reviewed for pharmacy services. There were three medication errors out of forty two opportunities yielding a medication error of 7.14% 1. The facility failed to ensure CMA W administered 3 capsules of Duloxetine to Resident #26 as ordered. 2. The facility failed to ensure CMA W read the alternate order for Omeprazole for Resident #26. 3. The facility failed to ensure CMA W did not crush medication with do not crush instruction for Resident #26. These failures could place residents at risk of wrong medication administration, mismanagement of care, adverse effects, and physical harm.
Inspectors wroteBased 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 3 (Residents #26, Resident #63, and Resident #4) of ten residents observed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA Z performed hand hygiene between resident (Resident #26 and Resident #63) care in the dining room on 12/05/2023 between 12:19 PM and 12:40 PM. 2. The facility failed to ensure CMA W sanitized the blood pressure cuff between Resident #4 and Resident #26. 3. The facility failed to ensure CMA W washed her hands wore gloves before administering nasal spray to Resident #4. These failures could place the residents at risk of cross-contamination and development of infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to treat residents with respect and dignity and care in a manner and in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality for 2 (Resident #26 and Resident #63) of 8 residents reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure CNA Z did not provide dining assistance to Resident #63 and Resident #26 at the same time during the dining observation on 12/05/2023. This failure could affect residents that require dining assistance during mealtimes, placing them at risk for not receiving care and services with dignity. Findings Included: Review of Resident #26's Face Sheet dated 12/06/2023 revealed she was an [AGE] year-old female re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the resident was free from any physical or chemical restraints imposed for purposes of discipline or convenience, and not required to treat the resident's medical symptoms for 1 of 6 (Resident #49) residents reviewed for restraints. The facility failed to ensure Resident #49 was not left sitting in a Geriatric (elderly) Chair (with the feeding tray still fully attached, while the resident was sitting in the media room. This failure could unnecessarily inhibit the resident's freedom of movement or activity.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure that all alleged violations involving abuse, neglect, exploitation or mistreatment, including injuries of unknown source and misappropriation of resident property, were reported immediately for 1 of 1 Resident (Residents #12) reviewed for neglect, and exploitation or misappropriation. The facility failed to report Resident #12's fall to the Texas Department of Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) on 11/23/23. This failure could place residents at risk of sustaining an injury and not receiving all services .
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident received an accurate assessment, reflective of the resident's status for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #26) reviewed for Accuracy of Assessments. The facility failed to ensure Resident #26's Quarterly MDS assessment dated [DATE] and 10/29/2023 accurately reflected that Resident #26 had impairments to the upper extremity and lower extremity on one side of the body. 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, interview and record review , the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan 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 for one (Resident #26) of 20 residents reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure the comprehensive care plan for Residents #26 was developed and identified and implemented goals and interventions to accurately address the resident's need for dining assistance. This failure could place residents that require dining assistance at risk for not receiving care and services to meet their needs. Findings Included: Review of Resident #26's Face Sheet dated 12/06/2023 revealed she was an [AGE] year-old female re-admitted to the facility on [DATE]. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure the timeliness of each resident's person-centered, comprehensive care plan, and to ensure that the comprehensive care plan is reviewed and revised by an interdisciplinary team for 1 (Resident #26) of 6 residents reviewed for Revised Care Plan. The facility failed to ensure Resident #26's care plan was revised to reflect the specific devices used for Resident #26's impairment. This failure could place the resident at risk of needs not being met.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident who was incontinent of bladder received services and assistance to prevent urinary tract infections for one (Resident #4) of two residents reviewed for urinary incontinence. The facility failed to place Resident #4's indwelling urinary foley catheter device below the bladder. This failure placed the resident at risk for the development of new or worsening urinary tract infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed the medication was labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles and include the appropriate accessory and cautionary instructions for one (Resident #4) of two residents reviewed for labelling of drugs and biologicals. The facility failed to ensure CMA W placed a change of instruction label for Resident #4's Phenytoin after a change to the order. This failure could place residents at risk of wrong medication administration, mismanagement of care, adverse effects, and physical harm.
6 fire safety citations on file: 6 on April 23, 2026.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| December 6, 2024 | Fine | $18,179 |
| December 8, 2023 | Fine | $13,780 |
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) | 3.64 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.58 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.25 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.31 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.75 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 31.3% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 41.2% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.95 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 3.79 on weekdays and 3.25 on weekends, 14% 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 3.37 in April to June 2025 to 3.64 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 | 3.64 | 0.58 | 3.79 | 3.25 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 90 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.54 | 0.57 | 3.70 | 3.12 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 96 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.45 | 0.61 | 3.62 | 3.01 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 101 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.37 | 0.73 | 3.56 | 2.90 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 102 |
| 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. 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 | 12.0 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.3 | 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 | 4.3 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.4 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 10.6 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.7 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 9.7 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 31.9 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 9.4 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 4.2 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.2 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Garnet Hill Rehabilitation and Skilled Care's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (57.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
57.6% 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. 117 eligible stays.
12.5% 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. 143 eligible stays.
8.2% 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. 97 eligible stays.
41.4% 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. 29 residents counted.
1.3% 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. 76 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. 76 residents counted.
90.9% 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. 22 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: SOUTH LIMESTONE HOSPITAL DISTRICT. CMS links this home to Stonegate Senior Living, a group of 24 nursing homes averaging 2.4 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| South Limestone Hospital District | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 02/27/2015 |
| Umb Bank National Association | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 09/23/2021 | |
| Price, Larry | Corporate officer | Individual | 06/01/1982 | |
| Pf Gh SNF Ops, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 09/23/2021 | |
| Stonegate Senior Living, LP | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 06/22/2022 | |
| Anene, Sylvia | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/17/2025 | |
| Campbell, Scott | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 12/02/2025 | |
| Chance, James | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 12/04/2025 | |
| Fisher, James | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 12/04/2025 | |
| Langdon, Thomas | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 12/02/2025 | |
| McGehee, William | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 12/02/2025 | |
| Taylor, John | Individual is an owner, partner or trustee of any ADP of the SNF | Individual | 12/02/2025 | |
| Lifetime Wellness, Ltd. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/23/2021 | |
| Martus Financial Services, Inc. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/31/2023 | |
| Pf Gh SNF Ops, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/02/2025 | |
| Pharmerica Drug Systems LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/27/2017 | |
| Preservation Freehold Company | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/23/2021 | |
| Rehab Pro LP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/23/2021 | |
| Sanctuary LTC, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 09/23/2021 | |
| Stonegate Senior Living, LP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/02/2025 | |
| Allison, Jennifer | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/14/2019 | |
| Anene, Sylvia | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 11/17/2025 | |
| Sharma, Neeraj | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/01/2012 |
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.