1303 E Main St., Honey Grove, TX 75446 · Fannin County · (903) 378-2293
102 certified beds, about 36 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1992
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 675066 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on December 18, 2025, inspectors cited 6 health deficiencies (the Texas average is 9.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 40 health citations since July 2023, 4 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (3 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 1 fine totaling $80,698 in the last three years; the largest was $80,698, and the latest is dated September 26, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.50 hours per resident per day, against 3.39 across Texas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.59 of those hours.
CMS links it to Creative Solutions in Healthcare, an affiliated group of 149 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 40 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to collaborate with hospice representatives and coordinate the hospice care for each resident receiving hospice services, to ensure the quality of care for the resident ensuring communication with the hospice medical team and others participating in the provision of care for 1 of 11 (Resident #1) residents reviewed for hospice services. The facility failed to coordinate care with Resident #1's hospice provider in that they administered IV fluids without notifying the hospice provider. These deficient practices could place residents who receive hospice services at risk of receiving inadequate end-of-life care due to lack of documentation, coordination of care, and communication of resident's needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure residents had the right to a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely for 9 of 15 resident rooms on Hall's 2 and 3 (Resident room [ROOM NUMBER], #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, and #9). The facility failed to ensure that Resident room [ROOM NUMBER], #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, and #9 were thoroughly cleaned and sanitized. This deficient practice could place residents at risk of living in an unclean and unsanitary environment which could lead to a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety for the facility's only kitchen, reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to ensure the ice machine in the dining area was thoroughly cleaned. This failure placed residents at risk of exposure to food contamination and illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to treat each resident with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promoted maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 1 (Resident #7) of 6 residents reviewed for dignity. The facility failed to provide a privacy bag for Resident #7's catheter bag (collects urine from the urinary bladder) on 12/16/2025. This failure could place the residents at risk of not having their right to a dignified existence maintained.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure the right to reside and receive services in the facility with reasonable accommodation of resident needs and preferences for 1 (Resident #42) of 16 residents reviewed for reasonable accommodation of needs. The facility failed to ensure the call light system in Resident #42's room was in a position that was accessible to the resident on 12/16/2025. This failure could place the residents at risk of being unable to obtain assistance when needed and help in the event of an emergency. Record review of Resident #42's Face Sheet, dated 12/16/2025, reflected a [AGE] year-old female admitted on [DATE]. The resident was diagnosed with psychomotor deficit (affects how a person moves and thinks) following a nontraumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage (brain bleed). [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan for each resident, consistent with the resident rights set forth that included measurable objectives and timeframes to meet a resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs were identified in the comprehensive assessment for a resident for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #5) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to ensure Resident #5's care plan was revised upon her return from her hospital stay on 08/28/25 for breathing complications. This failure could place residents at risk of their needs not being met.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident's environment remained as free from accident hazards as possible for 1 (Resident #2) of 5 residents reviewed for environmental hazards. The facility failed to ensure Resident #2's fall mat was properly placed next to his bed on 12/16/2025. This failure could place the residents at risk for injury.
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 and failed to ensure each resident received adequate supervision and assistance devices to prevent accidents for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for accidents and supervision. The facility failed to ensure CNA A performed safe bed positioning on 4/15/2025 while performing incontinent care on Resident #1 when CNA A did not follow the Kardex (plan of care) which stated Resident #1 was a two person assist with bed positioning, resulting in Resident #1 falling from the elevated bed causing major injury of a left hip fracture (broken bone), lacerations above her left eye, and a hematoma (collection of blood) to her forehead. The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The IJ began on 4/15/25 and ended on 4/16/25. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained free of accident hazards as possible, and each resident received adequate supervision to prevent elopement for 1 of 5 residents (Resident #42) reviewed for accident hazards and supervision. 1. The facility did not ensure Resident #42 received adequate supervision to prevent exiting the facility without staff knowledge on 09/15/24. 2. The facility did not ensure exits accessible to residents who could exit unsupervised alarmed loud enough to allow staff to respond in a timely manner. An IJ was identified on 09/23/24. The IJ template was provided to the facility on [DATE] at 5:32 p.m. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed provide pharmaceutical services (including procedures that assure the accurate acquiring, receiving, dispensing, and administering of all drugs and biologicals) to meet the needs of each resident, for 1 of 7 residents (Resident #40) reviewed for medication administration. 1. The facility did not ensure Resident #40 was given the correct dosage of alprazolam (antianxiety medication). 2. The facility did not ensure Resident #40's alprazolam (antianxiety medication) and Tylenol #3 (pain medication) labels from the pharmacy matched the orders placed in the electronic charting system. 3. The facility did not ensure RN G updated Resident #40's losartan potassium (blood pressure medication) order to match the clarification orders received from the physician. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the meals served met the nutritional needs of residents for 1 of 1 meal (the lunch meal) reviewed for nutritional adequacy. The facility did not service a whole egg roll with the lunch meal on 9/26/2024. This failure could affect all residents in the facility by placing them at risk of not receiving adequate nutritive food value needed to promote/maintain health.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide food that was palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature for 4 of 7 confidential residents reviewed for food and nutrition services. The facility failed to ensure dietary staff provided food that was palatable and had an appetizing temperature on 9/26/2024 for confidential residents. These failures could place residents at risk of decreased food intake, hunger, and unwanted weight loss.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety in the facility's only kitchen reviewed for food safety requirements. The facility failed to ensure the can opener blade was free of a black substance. The facility failed to ensure the steam table wells were clean and free of food debris. The facility failed to ensure the fryer was cleaned after use and free of food debris, and the fryer baskets free from hard cooked on food on the bottom of the baskets appearing to be French fries. The facility failed to ensure 3 skillets were free from carbon build up on the cooking surface of the pan. The facility failed to ensure the stove top was free from black burned on material in the burner wells. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, 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 2 of 2 (Resident #40 and #42) and 1 of 1 laundry cart reviewed for infection control practices. 1)The facility failed to ensure CNA F and RN G properly cleaned the perineal/genital areas for Resident #'s 40 and 42 during incontinent care . 2)The facility did not ensure Housekeeper H covered the clean linen cart while passing out clean linens on 09/23/2024. These deficient practices could place residents at risk for infection due to improper care practices.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and comfortable homelike environment for 1 of 16 resident rooms (Resident #38) reviewed for environment. The facility failed to ensure Resident #38's door was properly functioning. This failure could place residents at risk for an uncomfortable, unhomelike environment, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure assessments accurately reflected the resident status for 2 of 16 residents (Residents #42 and #43) reviewed for MDS assessment accuracy. 1. The facility did not ensure Resident #42's MDS assessment was accurately coded for wandering. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #43's antibiotic use was accurately coded. These failures could place residents at risk for not receiving care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan to meet resident's medical, nursing, mental and psychosocial needs identified in the comprehensive assessment for 1 of 16 residents (Resident #1) reviewed for care plans. The facility failed to care plan that Resident #1 was PASRR positive for mental illness and an intellectual disability. These failures could place the residents at increased risk of not having their individual needs met and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident received appropriate treatment and services to prevent urinary tract infections for 2 of 2 residents (Resident #40 and Resident #42) reviewed for incontinent care. The facility failed to ensure CNA F and RN G properly cleaned the perineal/genital areas for Resident #'s 40 and 42 during incontinent care. These failures could place residents at risk for urinary tract infections.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents requiring respiratory care were provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practices for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #10) reviewed for respiratory care. 1. The facility failed to administer Resident #10's oxygen as ordered by the physician. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #10's oxygen flow meter on the oxygen concentrator was functioning properly and undamaged. These failures could place residents who receive respiratory care at risk for developing respiratory complications and a decreased quality of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews the facility failed to provide special eating equipment and utensils for residents who need them and appropriate assistance to ensure that the resident can use the assistive devices when consuming meals for 2 of 2 (Residents #19 and #4) residents reviewed for special eating equipment and assistance when consuming meals. 1. The facility failed to provide Resident #19's physician ordered sippy cup with each meal tray. 2. The facility failed to ensure Resident #4 had a physician's ordered cup with lid and handles for drinking fluids. These failures could place residents at risk for harm by weight loss, diminished independence, and self-esteem.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to collaborate with hospice representatives and coordinate the hospice care planning process for each resident receiving hospice services, to ensure quality of care for the resident, ensuring communication with the hospice medical director, the resident's attending physician, and others participating in the provision of care for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #40) reviewed for hospice services. The facility failed to obtain Resident #40's most recent updated hospice plan of care. The facility failed to ensure Resident #40's hospice plan of care accurately reflect his medication regimen. The deficient practices could place residents who receive hospice services at-risk of receiving inadequate end-of-life care due to a lack of documentation, coordination of care, and communication of resident needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents were free of any significant medication errors for 1 of 5 (Resident #1) residents reviewed for medication errors. The facility failed to ensure on 6/2/24 Resident #1 received 55 units of Lantus (long-acting insulin for diabetes) as ordered and instead was administered 55 units of Humalog (short-acting insulin for diabetes). The noncompliance was identified as PNC. The noncompliance began on 6/2/24 and ended on 6/3/24. The facility had corrected the noncompliance before the survey began. This failure could place residents at risk for receiving the incorrect medication and dosage resulting in adverse reactions. Findings Include: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, observation, 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 8 of 15 residents (Resident #2, Resident #10, Resident #20, Resident #23, Resident #25, Resident #28, Resident #29, and Resident #31) and 2 of 4 medication carts (Hall 5 and Hall 6) reviewed for pharmacy services. The facility failed to ensure Resident #29 received Ribavirin (An antiviral medication that is used to treat chronic hepatitis C. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure any irregularities noted by the pharmacist during the review were documented on a separate, written report that was sent to the attending physician and the facility's medical director and director of nursing and listed, at minimum, the resident's name, the relevant drug, and the irregularity the pharmacist identified for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #29) reviewed for drug regimen review. The facility failed to ensure Pharmacist Consultant V notified the facility of the black box warning associated with Resident #29's Ribavirin (an antiviral medication that is used to treat chronic hepatitis C, Ribavirin is not effective when used alone). This failure could place residents at risk of having adverse consequences related to medications not being properly reviewed.
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 safety in the facility's only kitchen. The facility did not ensure: 1. An open bag of pre-cut chocolate chip cookies in the freezer had an open date or were stored properly. 2. A bag of an unknown ground meat substance, dated 07/21/23, was labeled and thawing properly in the refrigerator. 3. A container of white gravy, dated 07/24/23, had a discard by or use by date. 4. A container of brown gravy, dated 07/22/23, had a discard by or use by date. 5. An expired container of turkey, discard date of 07/23/23, was removed from the refrigerator. 6. A container of super pudding, dated 07/21/23, with no discard by or use by date. 7. 4 clear packages of a meat-like substance cut into strips were labeled in the refrigerator. 8. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program so that facility is free of pests and rodents for the facility's only kitchen and dry storage room. The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to ensure the facility was free of flies in the kitchen and mouse droppings in the dry storage room. These findings could place residents at risk for an unsanitary environment and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure that the resident environment remains as free of accident hazards as is possible to prevent accidents for 2 of 6 hallways (Hall 2 and Hall 5) reviewed for accidents and hazards. The facility did not ensure the flooring on Hall 2 and Hall 5 were even, and free of cracked tiles. This failure could place residents at an increased risk for serious injury related to falls.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews and record review the facility failed to ensure all drugs and biologicals used in the facility were stored in a locked compartment, only accessible by authorized personnel, and labeled, stored, and dated correctly for 2 of 4 medication carts (Hall 2 and Hall 5 medication carts) reviewed for storage of medications. 1. The facility failed to ensure Hall 2 and Hall 5 medication cart was secured and unable to be accessed by unauthorized personnel. 2. The facility failed to ensure 1 insulin pen (device used to administer insulin to residents with high blood sugars) on the Hall 2 medication cart was dated when opened. 3. The facility failed to ensure 3 Albuterol Sulfate Inhalation Solution (inhalation solution used to open the airways for breathing) on the Hall 2 medication cart were dated when opened. 4. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the meals served to residents met the nutritional needs of residents for 1 of 1 meal (the lunch meal), as evidenced by: The facility did not ensure [NAME] Q followed the recipe for pureeing the breaded pork chop and the garlic buttered pasta during the lunch meal. These failures could place residents at risk for weight loss, not having their nutritional needs met, and a decreased quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide food that was palatable and served at an appetizing temperature for 4 of 15 residents (Resident's #9, #10, #23, and #25) reviewed for palatable food. The facility failed to provide palatable food served at an appetizing temperature or taste to Resident #9, Resident #10, Resident #23, and Resident #25 who complained the food was served cold and did not taste good. This failure could place residents who ate food from the kitchen at risk of weight loss, altered nutritional status, and diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to follow their own established smoking policy for the facility's only smoking area. The facility did not ensure a metal container with self-closing cover devices were available in the smoking area. This failure could place residents at risk of an unsafe smoking environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure residents have 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 and to choose the option he or she prefers for 1 of 5 residents reviewed for right to be informed. (Resident #23) The facility failed to ensure Resident #23 had signed psychotropic consent form for Paxil (antidepressant). This failure could place residents at risk for treatment or services without informed consent.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to assure residents who have authorized the facility in writing to manage any personal funds have ready and reasonable access to those funds for 1 of 15 residents (Resident #10) reviewed for personal funds. The facility failed to ensure Resident #10 had access to her personal funds when she requested it. This failure could place residents whose funds are managed by the facility at risk of not receiving their personal funds deposited with the facility and not having their rights and preferences honored.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the right to formulate an advance directive was provided for 1 of 15 residents (Resident #6) reviewed for advanced directives. The facility did not ensure Resident #6's OOH-DNR was signed by the responsible party and the notary. The facility did not ensure Resident #6's OOH-DNR was dated by the responsible party upon obtaining their signature. These failures could place residents at risk of not receiving care and services to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide a safe, clean, and comfortable environment for 1 of 15 residents (Resident #10) reviewed for environment. The facility failed to ensure Resident #10's door was in good repair. This failure could place residents at risk for an uncomfortable, unhomelike environment, and a diminished quality of life.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the completion of a significant change assessment for 1 of 7 residents reviewed for Significant Change Assessments. (Resident #23). The facility did not complete a significant change assessment for Resident #23 within 14 days of admitting to hospice services. This failure could place residents at risk of not receiving adequate services and reimbursement to meet their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement a comprehensive person-centered care plan to meet resident's medical, nursing, and mental and psychosocial needs identified in the comprehensive assessment for 2 of 15 residents (Resident #6, Resident #22) reviewed for care plans. The facility did not develop Resident #6's care plan related to self-inflicted injuries. The facility failed to ensure Resident #22's care plan indicated the correct code status. This failure could place residents at risk for injuries, inaccurate care plans and decreased quality of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents requiring respiratory care were provided such care, consistent with professional standards of practices for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #23) reviewed for respiratory care. The facility did not ensure Resident #23's oxygen was administered at 2 liters per minute via nasal cannula as prescribed by the physician. This failure could place residents who receive respiratory care at risk for developing respiratory complications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review the facility failed to ensure safe and sanitary storage of resident's food items for 1 of 6 residents reviewed for personal food safety. (Resident's #41) The facility did not implement the personal food policy related to personal refrigerators for Resident's #41. These failures could place the residents at risk for food borne illness.
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 3 of 5 staff (CNA A, CNA B, LVN D) reviewed for infection control. 1. The facility failed to ensure CNA A and CNA B changed gloves and performed hand hygiene when providing incontinent care to Resident #44. 2. The facility failed to ensure LVN D cleaned the glucometer after using it on a resident. These failures could place residents and staff at risk for cross-contamination and the spread of infection.
10 fire safety citations on file: 2 on December 18, 2025, 4 on September 26, 2024, 4 on July 28, 2023.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| September 26, 2024 | Fine | $80,698 |
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) | 3.50 | 3.39 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.59 | 0.43 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.21 | 2.98 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.72 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 1.19 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | not reported | 55.3% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | not reported | 54.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | not reported |
CMS expects 4.27 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 3.61 on weekdays and 3.21 on weekends, 11% 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 3.24 in April to June 2025 to 3.50 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 | 3.50 | 0.59 | 3.61 | 3.21 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 36 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.37 | 0.60 | 3.52 | 2.98 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 37 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.13 | 0.48 | 3.21 | 2.91 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 38 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.24 | 0.42 | 3.36 | 2.96 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 37 |
| 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 | 22.2 | 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 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.4 | 3.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 29.4 | 14.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.3 | 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.9 | 9.6 | 15.4 |
| 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 | 2.3 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Honey Grove Nursing Center's Medicare short-stay residents. How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
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 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. 11 eligible stays.
11.0% 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. 28 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. 10 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. 7 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: 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. 12 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: 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. 12 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. 1 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: WEST WHARTON COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT. CMS links this home to Creative Solutions in Healthcare, a group of 149 nursing homes averaging 2.1 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| West Wharton County Hospital District | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 12/01/2023 |
| Huggins, Linda | Corporate director | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Mak, David | Corporate officer | Individual | 05/17/2021 | |
| Honey Grove I Enterprises LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 12/01/2023 | |
| Blake, Gary | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2023 | |
| Blake, Malisa | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2023 |
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.