4403 74th St., Lubbock, TX 79424 · Lubbock County · (806) 795-0668
90 certified beds, about 60 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 2000
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 675853 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on March 5, 2026, inspectors cited 3 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 31 health citations since November 2023, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $30,561 in the last three years; the largest was $30,561, and the latest is dated December 9, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 2.97 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.20 of those hours.
61.5% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Gulf Coast LTC Partners, an affiliated group of 20 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 31 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, 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 grooming, and personal hygiene for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for ADL care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 was cleaned of bowel movement and urine on 5/10/2026 and on 5/11/2026. This failure could place the residents at risk for skin breakdown, infection and poor self-esteem.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, observation, and record review the facility failed to provide pharmaceutical services that assured the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all medications to meet the needs of the residents and establishes a system of records of receipt and disposition of all drugs in sufficient detail to enable an accurate reconciliation for 1 of 1 medication pass reviewed for pharmaceutical services in that:1. LVN A failed to document medications given on the EMAR immediately after administration to each resident during the nighttime medication administration on 4/30/26.2. LVN A failed to use the EMAR when she administered medications to residents during the nighttime medication administration on 4/30/26 and instead used a handwritten log as reference. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview 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 5 of 7 residents (Residents #1, #2, #3, #4, #5) and 1 of 1 staff (LVN A) reviewed for infection control. LVN A failed to sanitize hands between residents during medication administration for Residents #1, # 2, #3, #4, and #5 on 4/30/26. This failure could place residents at risk for spread of infection and cross contamination.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, observation, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all residents were treated with respect and dignity for 1 of 7 residents (Resident # 1) reviewed for dignity. LVN A failed to treat Resident #1 with respect and dignity when she told Resident #1 to go to his room or to go outside and smoke when he asked for medications and when he was talking to staff and visitors in the dining room. This failure placed residents at risk of emotional distress, embarrassment, and lower self-esteem.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were stored in locked compartments for 1 of 1 medication carts (Station 1 Cart) observed in the facility. The facility failed to ensure the Station 1 medication cart was secured when unattended on 4/30/26. This failure could place residents at risk of having access to unauthorized medications and/or lead to possible harm, drug overdose, or drug diversion.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were stored properly in a locked compartment for 1 of 2 nurse carts (Nurse Cart A) reviewed for medication storage. The facility failed to ensure Nurse Cart A was locked when not in use. This failure could place residents at risk of having access to unauthorized medications and lead to an increased risk for drug diversion and possible harm.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to provide or obtain laboratory services only when ordered by a physician for 1 of 24 residents (Resident #8) reviewed for laboratory results in that:The facility failed to ensure Resident #8's Dilantin (Phenytoin) blood level was drawn monthly on the 21st of each month, as ordered by the physician, in January 2026 or February 2026. The facility failed to ensure Resident #8's Keppra (Levetiracetam) blood level was drawn monthly on the 21st of each month, as ordered by the physician, in January 2026 or February 2026. This failure could place residents with laboratory work orders at risk of not having their medical needs met.
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 6 residents (Resident #41) reviewed for infection control. The facility failed to ensure Resident #41's room had clear signage regarding Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP). This failure could place residents at risk for cross contamination and infection.
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 3 of 3 residents (Resident #1, Resident #2 and #3) reviewed for infection control.1. CNA A failed to change gloves when going from dirty to clean when providing incontinence care for Residents #1, #2, and #3. These failures could place residents at risk for cross contamination and infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, 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, but not later than 2 hours if the alleged violation involved abuse or neglect and resulted in bodily injury, to other officials (including the State Agency) and the Abuse Coordinator for 3 of 6 residents (Resident #1, #2, and #3) reviewed for abuse. A. The ADM failed to follow the facility's abuse policy by not reporting the allegation of abuse to HHSC regarding Resident #1 being fed forcibly by CNA A on an unknown date. B. The ADM failed to follow the facility's abuse policy by not reporting the allegation of abuse to HHSC regarding Resident #2 being transferred in a rough manner (chucked in the bed) by CNA A on an unknown date. C. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to be equipped to allow residents to call for staff through a communication system which relayed the call directly to a centralized staff work area for 14 of 74 residents (Resident #3, #11, #12, #19, #20, #24, #28, #38, #40, #44, #47, #58, #62, and #65) reviewed for call lights. The facility failed to ensure residents were equipped with a fully functioning call light system in room [ROOM NUMBER] and room [ROOM NUMBER]. Resident #11 had a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes and COPD (Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), both which would require immediate attention if Resident #11 needed oxygen, or his blood sugar fell too low or got too high. Resident #12 had a diagnosis of type e2 diabetes which would require immediate attention if blood sugar were to get too high or too low. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a private space for the resident's monthly Resident Council meetings for 13 of 13 anonymous residents who attended Resident Council meetings. (Resident Council 12/04/2024). The facility failed to provide a private place for residents to be able to hold Resident Council Meetings monthly. This failure could result in issues affecting the residents' feeling that their grievances are not being acted upon and could place all residents who attend the Resident Council meetings at risk for feelings of powerlessness and decreased self-worth.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that each residents environment remained as free from accident hazards as possible for 2 of 27 residents (Resident #12, Resident #28,) and reviewed for accidents. 1. The facility failed to ensure 3 resident rooms (rooms [ROOM NUMBER]) did not have electrical outlets protruding from the wall. 2. The facility failed to ensure 1 resident room (room [ROOM NUMBER]), where Resident #12 resided, did not have an electrical outlet protruding from the wall with exposed wires. Resident #12 had a BIMS score of 03, indicating she had severe cognitive impairment, and she was able to self-ambulate in her wheelchair. This failure could place residents at risk for fires, physical harm, electrocution, pain, mental anguish, emotional distress, and injury.
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 for 3 (Resident #50, Resident #68, Resident #35) of 7 residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to follow their policy for proper storage of oxygen tubing for Resident #50, Resident #68, and Resident #35. This failure could place residents at risk for respiratory compromise and infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide food that was palatable, and at a safe, and appetizing temperature for 3 of 3 food forms (Regular, Mechanical Soft, and Pureed) for 1 of 1 meal reviewed for palatability. 1) The facility failed to provide food that was palatable for 3 of 3 food forms served (Regular, Mechanical Soft, and Puree) at 1 of 1 meal observed (12/03/24 lunch). These failures could place residents at risk of decreased food intake, hunger, and unwanted weight loss.
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. 1) The facility failed to keep refrigerator handles clean 2) The facility failed to properly store a cupcake pan. 3) The facility failed to properly store food in the pantry and refrigerator. 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 maintain and ensure safe and sanitary storage of residents' food items for 4 of 4 refrigerators reviewed for food safety (room [ROOM NUMBER], 122, 133, 142). The refrigerator located in room [ROOM NUMBER] did not have an up-to-date temperature log nor did it have a thermometer inside of the refrigerator. The refrigerator contained undated perishable food items. The refrigerator located in room [ROOM NUMBER] did not have a temperature log present nor did it have a thermometer inside of the refrigerator. The refrigerator contained undated perishable food items. The refrigerator located in room [ROOM NUMBER] did not have an up-to-date temperature log nor did it have a thermometer inside of the refrigerator. The refrigerator contained undated perishable food items. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide information to resident's and their representatives on their rights related to filing grievances or concerns for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #51). The facility failed to ensure 1 of 1 resident were provided a copy of the grievance that Resident #51 had filed, upon request, Resident #51 had the right to obtain a written decision related to their grievance. This failure could place the residents at risk of unresolved grievances, decreased quality of life, and feeling of hopelessness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were stored properly for 2 of 2 medication carts (Station 1 medication cart, and Station 2 medication cart), reviewed for medication storage. 1. The medication cart assigned to Station 1 had loose pills. 2. The medication cart assigned to Station 2 had loose pills. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving prescribed medications as ordered and drug diversions.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain an infection control program designed to provide a safe, comfortable, and sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of diseases for 2 (Resident #1 and Resident #61) of 3 residents and 1 (LVN A) of 2 staff reviewed for infection control. LVN A failed to perform hand hygiene between glove changes while providing wound care for Resident #1. LVN A failed to perform hand hygiene following a wound care procedure for Resident #1. LVN A failed to perform hand hygiene between glove changes while providing wound care for Resident #61. These failures could place residents at risk for spread of infection and cross contamination.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program so that the facility was free of pests in 1 of 6 resident rooms (room [ROOM NUMBER]) located on 1 of 2 facility corridors (East Hall): 1)Roaches were observed crawling on the walls and floor in 1 of 6 resident rooms (room [ROOM NUMBER]) located on 1 of 2 facility corridors (East Hall), and 2) The pest control program was further compromised due to the facility having harborage areas that were not repaired, clean and/or orderly (hand sink cabinetry and adjacent wall area, clutter). These failures could place residents at risk for infections.
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. 1)The facility failed to ensure foods were processed, stored, and pureed under sanitary conditions. 2) The facility failed to ensure Dietary staff ensured food and non-food contact surfaces were clean. 3) The facility failed to ensure staff washed their hands in a sanitary manner. 4) The facility failed to ensure raw meat was thawed in a safe and sanitary manner. These failures could place residents at risk for food contamination and foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure the residents had the right to be informed of the risks, and participate in, his or her treatment which included the right to be informed in advance, by the physician or other practitioner or professional, of the risks and benefits of proposed care, of treatment and treatment alternatives or treatment options and to choose the alternative or option he or she preferred, for 7 of 22 residents (Residents #2, #7, #22, #25, #33, #37, and #57) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to obtain a signed informed consent based on information of the benefits, risks, and options available for Residents #2, #7, #22, #25, #33, #37, and #57 prior to administering melatonin (sleep aide). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as was possible in 9 of 26 resident rooms (119, 120, 132/133, 134/135, 138, 139/140) located on 2 of 2 nurse stations (Station 1 and 2) and 1 of 1 beauty shop and reviewed. The facility further failed to accurately assess each resident's status for safe smoking for one of one resident (Resident #49) reviewed for smoking assessment. The facility failed to maintain resident use hot water at safe and comfortable temperatures. Resident-use hot water was not reliably controlled. Hot water temperatures ranged from 117.9 to 124.2 F at 9 of 26 resident room hand sinks located on Stations 1 and 2 and beauty shop shampoo basin. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to use the services of a Registered Nurse (RN) for at least eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week for 6 out of 30 (10/15/23, 10/28/23,10/29/23, 10/31/23, 11/04/23, and 11/05/23) reviewed for RN coverage. The facility failed to ensure they had RN coverage 8 hours a day, 7 days a week for the following days: 10/15/23, 10/28/23,10/29/23, 10/31/23, 11/04/23, and 11/05/23 This failure could place residents at risk for inconsistency in care and services.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals were stored in locked compartments on for 2 medication cart (South-hall Medication Cart and North-hall Medication Cart)) of 2 carts reviewed for storage and 1 treatment cart (Station 2) of 2 treatment carts. The facility failed to ensure two narcotic boxes for 1 medication cart was always locked. The facility failed to ensure that medications were properly labeled and stored properly. The facility failed to ensure treatment cart medications were stored in a secure locked manner, while unattended, for 1 of 2 treatment carts (Station 2). This failure could place residents at risk of having access to unauthorized narcotic medications and/or lead to possible harm, drug overdose, or drug diversions.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to implement and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. 2 of 2 staff (LVN E and MA) and 1 of 22 LVN E and MA failed to implement effective handwashing techniques during medication pass. The facility failed to ensure that dressing change procedures were conducted in a sanitary manner for Resident #21. These failures could affect residents and staff members by placing them at risk for the transmission of communicable diseases, and infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the facility was adequately equipped to allow residents to call for staff assistance through a communication system which relayed the call directly to a staff member or to a centralized staff work area in 5 of 11 resident rooms (104, 107, 116, 119 and 120) on Station 2 (East wing). 1)The facility failed to ensure that 5 of 11 resident rooms had operable call systems at the bedroom and toilet. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving assistance when needed.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure all Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level I residents with mental illness were provided with an accurate PASRR Level I for 1 of 15 residents (Resident #54) reviewed for PASRR screening, in that: Resident #54 did not have an accurate PASRR Level 1 assessments when they had a diagnosis of mental illness. This failure could place residents with an inaccurate PASRR Level 1 Evaluation and no PASRR Level 2 Evaluation at risk for not receiving care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who is fed by enteral means receives the appropriate treatment to prevent complications of enteral feeding including but not limited to aspiration pneumonia, diarrhea, vomiting, dehydration, metabolic abnormalities, and nasal-pharyngeal ulcers for 1 of 2 residents fed by gastrostomy tube (Resident #21). 1)The facility failed to ensure nursing staff provided G-tube (gastrostomy tube) care in a sanitary manner and followed physician orders for Resident #21. These failures could result in the spread of resident infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to dispose of garbage and refuse properly in 1 of 2 dumpsters (west) and dumpster area. The facility failed to maintain the dumpster/refuse disposal containers and area in a manner that effectively prevented the harborage and attraction of pest. This failure could result in providing harborage and breeding areas for insects, rodents and other pests which could infest the facility.
5 fire safety citations on file: 3 on March 5, 2026, 2 on December 9, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| December 9, 2024 | Fine | $30,561 |
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) | 2.97 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.20 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.78 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.87 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.91 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 61.5% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | not reported | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.47 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 3.05 on weekdays and 2.78 on weekends, 9% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 2.8% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 2.86 in April to June 2025 to 2.97 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 | 2.97 | 0.20 | 3.05 | 2.78 | 2.8% | 0 of 90 | 60 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 2.73 | 0.15 | 2.78 | 2.58 | 0.7% | 0 of 92 | 63 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 2.67 | 0.13 | 2.78 | 2.39 | 1.8% | 5 of 92 | 64 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 2.86 | 0.14 | 2.97 | 2.56 | 2.5% | 0 of 91 | 63 |
| 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 | 38.8 | 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 | 3.9 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 35.0 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.6 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 11.6 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 15.0 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 12.7 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.2 | 2.2 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.0 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Hansford County Hospital District Dba Lakeridge Nu's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (36.6% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
36.6% 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. 29 eligible stays.
10.9% 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. 53 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.
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. 20 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. 18 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. 26 residents counted.
3.2% this home
Median of homes: Texas1.3% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 26 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Texas98.5% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 2 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: HANSFORD COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT. CMS links this home to Gulf Coast LTC Partners, a group of 20 nursing homes averaging 2.5 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hansford County Hospital District | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 04/01/2018 |
| Lubb-Tex Properties, LLC | 5% or greater mortgage interest | Organization | 04/01/2018 | |
| Bailey, Jonathan | Corporate officer | Individual | 02/01/2010 | |
| Lakeridge LTC Partners, Inc. | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 04/01/2018 | |
| Bergeron, Bobby | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2018 | |
| Nicholson, Louis | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2018 | |
| Lakeridge LTC Partners, Inc. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/26/2025 | |
| Lubb-Tex Properties, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/01/2018 | |
| Jones, James | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/27/2022 | |
| McPherson, Michael | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2015 |
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.