8836 Mars Dr, Hewitt, TX 76643 · Mc Lennan County · (254) 420-5500
140 certified beds, about 79 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 2009
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 676213 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 25, 2026, inspectors cited 4 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 30 health citations since January 2024, 6 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (4 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 3 fines totaling $33,539 in the last three years; the largest was $13,887, and the latest is dated July 29, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.20 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.39 of those hours.
62.5% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Texas average 55.3%).
CMS links it to Hmg Healthcare, an affiliated group of 31 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 30 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident that described the services that are to be furnished to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 3 of 10 (Resident #53, Resident # 74, Resident # 83) residents reviewed for care plans. -The facility failed to ensure the care plan for Resident #53 addressed the care needs of the resident with a colostomy regarding her specific stoma care and how often the site is to be changed and cleaned.-The facility failed to ensure the care plan for Resident # 74 and Resident # 83 address the care needs and refusals of the residents regarding nail care. This failure placed the residents at risk of not having their care needs met to maintain health status.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received services in the facility with reasonable accommodations of resident's needs and preferences except when to do so would endanger the health and safety of the resident or other residents for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #75) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure Resident #75's call light was within reach on 06/23/26. This failure could place residents at risk of needs not being met.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record reviews, and interviews, the facility failed to provide a safe, functional, sanitary and comfortable environment for residents for one(Resident #80) of 1 facility reviewed for ADL care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #80's shower chair did not have yellow-brown discoloration extending across the center of the seat surface and dark black substance near one of the seat drainage holes. The failure could place residents at risk of living in an unsafe, unsanitary, and uncomfortable environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to assure that menus are developed and prepared to meet resident choices including their nutritional, religious, cultural, and ethnic needs while using established national guidelines, for 1 of 3 meals observed. The facility failed to document the substitutions for the lunch menu on 06/23/26. These failures placed the residents at risk of decreased intake, dissatisfaction with their meals, and weight loss.
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 5 residents (Resident #2) reviewed for infection control practices. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2's soiled wash cloth was removed from the bedside table on 12/22/2025The facility failed to ensure Resident # 2's urinal bottle was emptied on 12/22/2025. This failure placed residents at risk of cross contamination.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure, in accordance with accepted professional standards and practices, medical records were maintained on each resident that were complete and accurately documented for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #1) for complete and accurate records. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1's nothing by mouth was documented in PCC for December 20th and December 21st on the 10:00 PM -6:00 AM shift. This failure could place residents at risk for the possibility of not verifying the needed care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to submit a completed and accurate request for nursing facility specialized services in the LTC Online Portal within 20 business days from the IDT for 1 of 1 (Resident #1) resident reviewed for delinquent PASARR processes. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received the services recommended by the PASARR evaluation when they failed to submit a complete and accurate request for NFSS in the LTC online Portal within 20 business days from the IDT meeting. This failure caused a delay in her Medicaid Entitled Services including physical therapy and occupational therapy. This failure placed Resident #1 at risk of not achieving or maintaining her highest practicable level of physical functioning and could potentially result in increased disability.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received services in the facility with reasonable accommodations of resident's needs and preferences except when to do so would endanger the health and safety of the resident or other residents for 2 of 6 residents (Resident #7 and #34) reviewed for resident rights. The facility failed to ensure Resident's #7's and Resident #34's call lights were within reach on 04/15/25. This failure could place residents at risk of needs not being met.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to conduct initially and periodically a comprehensive, accurate, standardized reproducible assessment of each resident's functional capacity for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #45) reviewed for comprehensive assessments. The facility failed to complete an accurate comprehensive assessment for Resident #45 due to MDS assessment reflected resident received insulin and injections. This failure could place residents at risk of not having their care and treatment needs assessed to ensure necessary care and services were provided.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the residents had the right to be free from neglect for one (Resident #1) of five residents reviewed for neglect, in that: The facility failed to administer Resident #1's Levothyroxine (medication used to treat hypothyroidism) for an unknown period of time at the end of June 2024 and beginning of July 2024. This subsequently led to her TSH (Thyroid Stimulating Hormone) levels elevating to 28.62 (normal range is .450 - 5.330), resulting in a change of condition where she became fatigued, dizzy, and depressed. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified on 07/24/24 at 4:50 PM. While the IJ was removed on 07/29/24 at 12:15 PM, the facility remained out of compliance at a severity level of no actual harm and at a scope of pattern due to the facility's need to evaluate the effectiveness of the corrective systems. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on 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 (Resident #1) of five residents reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to administer Resident #1's Levothyroxine (medication used to treat hypothyroidism) for an unknown period of time at the end of June 2024 and beginning of July 2024. This subsequently led to her TSH (Thyroid Stimulating Hormone) levels elevating to 28.62 (normal range is .450 - 5.330), resulting in a change of condition where she became fatigued, dizzy, and depressed. An Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) was identified on 07/24/24 at 4:50 PM. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident who is incontinent of bladder receives appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections to the extent possible for three (Resident #1, Resident #2, and Resident #3) of six residents reviewed for incontinent care. The facility failed to: 1. Change Resident #1's foley catheter after she was diagnosed with a UTI until six days later and failed to ensure the catheter bag was not continuously laying on the ground on 07/24/24. 2. Ensure Resident #2 was provided incontinent care after CNAs E and F removed her dirty brief and put on a clean one. 3. Ensure sanitary infection control practices were used when CNA G provided incontinent care to Resident #3. CNA G also failed to don PPE per EBP protocol as Resident #3 had an indwelling catheter. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to obtain laboratory services to meet the needs of its residents for one (Resident #2) of five residents reviewed for laboratory services. The facility failed to collect a urine specimen for a UA (urine analysis) for Resident #2 as ordered by the physician on 07/19/24 until 07/24/24 because they were out of UA specimen collection cups. Resident #2 was diagnosed with a UTI on 07/28/24 which required antibiotics for seven days. This failure could place residents with indwelling urinary catheters at risk of infection, renal failure, urinary tract infections, and pain. Findings Included: Review of Resident #2's undated face sheet reflected a [AGE] year-old female who was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses including type II diabetes, chronic kidney disease, age-related physical debility, and morbid obesity. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice, the comprehensive person-centered care plan, and the residents' choices for one (Resident #1) of four residents reviewed for quality of care, in that: The facility failed: - To obtain orders for wound care after Resident #1 was found to have several round red areas to his upper bilateral buttocks on 06/30/24. On 07/03/24, one of the areas had opened, measuring 12 mm x 12 mm, causing him pain and a burning sensation for several days. [...]
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 one (Resident #2) of two residents observed for infection control practices. The facility failed to ensure staff (CNA E and CNA F) followed infection control practices while performing peri care on Resident #1. This failure placed residents at risk for cross contamination and the spread of infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that residents who needed respiratory care received such care consistent with professional standards of practice for 2 of 6 residents (Residents #1 and Resident #2) reviewed for respiratory care. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident #1 received weekly filter cleanings for her BiPAP machine (A BiPAP Machine is a respiratory machine used to provide positive airway pressure through a mask, worn while sleeping, to provide airway pressure during inhalation and exhalation to keep the user's throat open from collapsing.). 2. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were free of significant medication errors for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #234) reviewed for medication errors. The facility failed to accurately transcribe amitriptyline 10mg by mouth at bedtime and instead transcribed amitriptyline 300mg by mouth twice daily. The facility administered 300mg of amitriptyline to Resident #234 which caused an overdose that sent the resident to the hospital with abnormal labs and cardiac arrhythmia. This failure could place residents at risk for complications and possible death. This failure resulted in an identification of an Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) On 2/21/2024 @ 5:25pm. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents received quality care and quality treatment in accordance with professional standards of practice for 1 of 8 residents (Resident #25) reviewed for quality of care. The facility failed to apply an anti-fungal cream, per medical orders 2/14/2024 through 2/21/2024, which resulted in itching, intermittent burning, annoyance, and anger. This failure placed the residents at the facility at risk of having their needs not met.
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) Dietary staff failed to effectively reseal, label and date items in the walk-in refrigerator. 2) Dietary staff failed to effectively reseal, label and date items in the walk-in freezer. These failures could place residents at risk for food contamination and foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who were unable to conduct activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain acceptable grooming and personal hygiene for 2 of 8 residents (Resident #7 and Resident #40) reviewed for ADL Care. 1. The facility failed to provide Resident #7 with nail care, which resulted with some nails protruding past the fingertip, some nails gagged, and 8 of 10 digits had collection of dirt, stain, or debris under the nail on 02/20/2024. 2. The facility failed to provide Resident #40 with nail care, which resulted with nails protruding past the fingertip for all 10 digits. Resident's toenails on her left foot extended .5 an inch on two toes, which had begun to split and curl on 02/20/2024. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure they were 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 from each residents bedside and the toilet and bathing facilities for 3 of 8 residents (Resident #41, Resident #10 and Resident #51) reviewed for environment. 1. The facility failed to ensure Resident # 41's call light pull string, in the bathroom, was from free from entanglements and extended to its intended length and was reachable from lying on the floor. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident # 10's call light pull string, in the bathroom, was from free from entanglements and extended to its intended length and was reachable from lying on the floor. 3. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, observations, and record review the facility failed to complete an assessment that accurately reflected the resident's status for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #44) whose records were reviewed for MDS accuracy, in that: The facility failed to ensure that Resident #44's admission MDS assessment dated [DATE] reflected tobacco use. These failures by the facility placed residents at risk of not receiving the care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents diagnosed as having a mental illness were screened and evaluated prior to admission by the local authority and receive care and services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for PASRR screening. (Resident #18). The facility failed to correctly screen on admission [DATE]), and refer, Resident #18 who was diagnosed with mental illness to the appropriate state designated mental health or ID authority for evaluation. This failure placed residents at risk and could affect other residents with psychiatric diagnoses for not being assessed by the local authority and not receiving services to prevent declines.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan for each resident within 48 hours of the resident's admission that included instructions for providing effective and person-centered care for the resident and met professional standards of quality care for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #228) reviewed for care plans, in that: The facility failed to develop and implement a baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission for Resident #228 . This deficient practice could place residents at risk of not having their immediate care needs met or not receiving continuity of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview observations, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the residents' rights, which included measurable objectives and time limits to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental, and psychosocial needs for 2 of 6 residents (Residents #35 & #44) reviewed for care plans. Resident #35's comprehensive care plan dated 02/20/2024 did not address the resident's fentanyl patch. Resident #44's comprehensive care plan dated 01/26/24 did not address the resident's smoking. These deficient practices could place residents at risk for not receiving proper care and services due to inaccurate care plans.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was incontinent of bladder receives appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections and to restore continence to the extent possible for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #228) reviewed for incontinent care. Facility failed to evaluate Resident #228 for removal of newly placed indwelling catheter or establish a rational for original placement to establish a need for an indwelling foley catheter upon admission. This deficient practice could place residents at risk by exposing them to care that could lead to infection, tissue breakdown, communicable diseases, and feelings of isolation related to poor hygiene.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide medically-related social services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well-being of each resident.for 1 out of 6 residents (Resident # 234) reviewed for behaviors. The facility failed to provide appropriate behavioral health services and/or interventions to prevent or improve the depressive behaviors of Resident # 234. This deficient practice could place residents at risk for causing a delay in receiving appropriate services and a deterioration in the resident's psychosocial well-being.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure based on a comprehensive assessment of a resident, residents who had not used psychotropic drugs were not given these drugs unless the medication was necessary to treat specific condition as diagnosed and documented in the clinical record for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #230) reviewed for unnecessary psychotropic medications. The facility failed to ensure Resident #230's prescribed Bupropion (an antidepressant) was administered to treat a specific diagnosis . This failure could place residents at risk for adverse consequences such as impairment or decline in an individual's mental or physical condition or functional or psychosocial status.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident's medical records included documentation that indicated the resident, or their RP, received education of the benefits, and potential side effects, of the influenza or pneumococcal immunization, receipt of the influenza or pneumococcal immunization, or residents did not receive the influenza or pneumococcal immunization due to medical contraindication, or refusal, for 2 of 5 residents (RES #2 and RES #4) who were reviewed for immunizations, in that:. 1. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record reviews, the facility failed to implement their policy to ensure the resident's, or their RP, received education of the benefits and risks, or potential side effects of Covid-19 immunizations, receipt of Covid-19 immunizations, or the residents did not receive the Covid-19 immunizations, due to medical contraindication, or refusal, for 2 of 5 residents (RES #2 and RES #4) who were reviewed for immunizations. 1. The facility failed to document RES #2's medical records for having had received education, whether by self or with RP, of the benefits and risk, and potential side effects, of the Covid-19 immunization, receipt of the of the Covid-19 immunization, or having had not received the Covid-19 immunization due to medical contraindication or refusal. 2. [...]
7 fire safety citations on file: 2 on June 25, 2026, 1 on April 17, 2025, 4 on February 25, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| July 29, 2024 | Fine | $13,887 |
| May 14, 2024 | Fine | $6,155 |
| February 25, 2024 | Fine | $13,497 |
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) | 3.20 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.39 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.76 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.09 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.72 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 62.5% | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 33.3% | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.97 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 3.38 on weekdays and 2.76 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 3.72 in April to June 2025 to 3.20 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 | 3.20 | 0.39 | 3.38 | 2.76 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 79 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.43 | 0.49 | 3.62 | 2.94 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 71 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.69 | 0.37 | 3.89 | 3.18 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 74 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.72 | 0.29 | 3.98 | 3.06 | 0.0% | 1 of 91 | 72 |
| 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 | 16.8 | 15.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.8 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.6 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 18.9 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.8 | 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 | 13.9 | 25.7 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 6.8 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Hewitt Nursing and Rehabilitation's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (59.7% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
59.7% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Texas: 116 better, 50 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 75 eligible stays.
10.1% 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. 92 eligible stays.
6.8% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Texas: 4 better, 11 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 41 eligible stays.
43.5% this home
Median of homes: Texas57.3% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 23 residents counted.
5.7% 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. 35 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. 35 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. 17 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: WINNIE-STOWELL HOSPITAL DISTRICT. CMS links this home to Hmg Healthcare, a group of 31 nursing homes averaging 3.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stramecki, Anthony | Corporate director | Individual | 11/01/2016 | |
| Vratis, Kacey | Corporate director | Individual | 11/01/2020 | |
| Way, George | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2013 | |
| Murrell, Edward | Corporate officer | Individual | 11/01/2012 | |
| Rollo, Jeffery | Corporate officer | Individual | 11/01/2012 | |
| Way, George | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/2013 | |
| Hmg Park Manor of Hewitt, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 10/01/2021 | |
| Winnie-Stowell Hospital District | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 10/01/2021 | |
| Balsamo, Krystal | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Culp, Roland | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Daspit, Laurence | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Dohn, William | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Gallardo, Christopher | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/15/2025 | |
| Pico, Ana | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/04/2021 | |
| Prince, Derek | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Reinarz, Christian | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Rollo, Jeffery | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/01/2012 | |
| Sather, Debbie | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/18/2023 | |
| Singh, Darla | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/23/2024 | |
| Stramecki, Anthony | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/01/2016 | |
| Vratis, Kacey | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 11/01/2016 | |
| Way, George | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2013 | |
| Balsamo, Krystal | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Bhusari, Vaishali | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Dohn, William | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Gallardo, Christopher | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/15/2025 | |
| Reinarz, Christian | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2021 | |
| Sather, Debbie | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/18/2023 | |
| Singh, Darla | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/23/2024 | |
| Stanbridge, Norma | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/01/2021 |
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.